header-logo header-logo

23 February 2012
Issue: 7502 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Solicitors

Gurpinar v Solicitors Regulation Authority [2012] EWHC 192 (Admin), [2012] All ER (D) 100 (Feb)

In the context of an appeal against a decision of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal to strike the appellant solicitor off the roll following findings of professional misconduct, it was established law that the tribunal was an expert body and its assessment of the appropriate penalty in any given case was entitled to considerable respect. The court should not interfere with the tribunal’s decision unless it had erred in law or the penalty it had imposed had been clearly inappropriate. In circumstances where the appellant claimed to have communicated to the tribunal that he could not attend the hearing and where the tribunal proceeded in his absence, the tribunal could not be criticised for so proceeding where the court could not be satisfied that any of the appellant’s correspondence had ever been sent.
 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll