A barrister fined for an ‘extraordinary allegation of secret collusion between the [FTT] and HMRC’ concerning his tax affairs has failed with an appeal.
John Stenhouse was found by a disciplinary tribunal to have behaved in a way which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in him or in the profession. He acted in a way that could reasonably be seen by the public to undermine his integrity, the Bar Tribunals & Adjudication Service found.
Stenhouse was fined £15,000 and ordered to pay £8,049.48 costs.
Stenhouse’s misconduct related to emails to the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) and to HMRC, in which he made unfounded and serious allegations of misconduct in public office against a member of the FTT staff and an HMRC officer. He also made an unfounded and serious allegation of misconduct in public office against the president of the FTT (Tax Chamber).
Stenhouse appealed the tribunal findings and his sanction. In John Stenhouse v The Bar Standards Board, Mrs Justice Jefford dismissed all 12 grounds of appeal. Finding ‘no error’ in the tribunal’s decision ‘capable of founding an appeal’, the judge said: ‘The charge was primarily one of making serious and unfounded allegations of misconduct in public office…and there is no question that the words Mr Stenhouse used did so.
Read more
‘The particularisation of the charges (which were primarily of making unfounded and serious allegations of misconduct in public office) as ones of alleging “conspiracy” and “cover up” were common sense and objectively rational descriptions of the allegations Mr Stenhouse had made.’
The suggestion that the FTT president was improperly motivated in making any complaint was ’utterly unfounded’, the judge said. 'It seems to be based on nothing more than Mr Stenhouse’s continued conviction that he had said nothing rude or objectively offensive (which is wrong), so that anyone who did take offence and make a consequent complaint must be improperly motivated.'
