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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll