Naseem Ahmed Bajwa and James Selvaraj Lazar

• Application 10228-2009
• Hearing 10 February 2010
• Reasons 5 June 2010

The SDT made no order against the first respondent (registered as a registered foreign lawyer in 1999), of A Bajwa & Co, 39 Gowers Walk, London E1 8BS, and the second respondent (admitted 1995), of London E6. The allegation against the respondents was that they failed to ensure that there were adequate systems in place for the supervision of staff. The SDT had listened carefully to the evidence and submissions of the parties and had considered all the documents provided. The allegation was based on lack of supervision in relation to incoming post only and it was still not clear exactly how fraudulent work permit applications had been made. It was accepted that neither respondent had signed any of the fraudulent work permit application forms and the SDT noted the signatures on those forms were all different. The SDT was not satisfied that the applicant had proved that there had been inadequate supervision of the firm, notwithstanding the serious outcome. Furthermore, the applicant had confirmed the allegation was limited to the duration of the partnership from September 2002 until 2 April 2004, but he had been unable to confirm how many false work permit applications had been made during this period. The applicant had not shown what adequate supervision could have prevented the fraudulent work permit applications from being made.
The SDT did not find the allegation was substantiated and dismissed the applicant’s case.