A former office manager who was banned by the Solicitors Regulation Authority seven years ago has finally secured victory after an epic struggle to clear her name.

An adjudication panel of the SRA has ruled that a flawed 2016 order against Layla Dean-Verity be officially overturned in the light of new information.

The decision, which includes the overturning of a £1,350 costs order, marks a landmark moment in a 10-year battle by Dean-Verity to fight allegations of impropriety.

Dean-Verity, previously known as Anjum Tahirkheli, was a director and practice manager of Bradford firm Khan Solicitors along with her then husband Mohammed Khan. Her marriage broke down in May 2012 and three months later she was dismissed on the grounds of serious financial impropriety.

Her claim for unfair dismissal came in 2014 before Employment Judge Cox, who ruled that proper procedures had not been followed but that any compensation should be reduced by 100% because of Dean-Verity’s blameworthy conduct. The judge found the claimant had carried out four categories of unauthorised transaction for her own benefit and rejected her contention she had implied authority to do so.

Two years later, an SRA adjudication found that Dean-Verity had breached the code of conduct and issued a rebuke and section 43 order, restricting her from working for any solicitors firm. The decision, based substantially on the findings of the employment judge, was upheld by an adjudication panel and by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. 

Layla Dean

Dean-Verity was called to the bar in 2018 and is now practising at Erimus Chambers

It was only in 2018, when a solicitor with Khan Solicitors brought proceedings against Dean-Verity and her ex-husband, that some 855 pages of documents were disclosed which appeared to undermine the employment tribunal's decision.

Dean-Verity tried again to clear her name, applying to the SRA for review of the disciplinary decisions. An adjudicator revoked the section 43 sanctions but not the rebuke.

In January this year, Regional Employment Judge Robertson revoked the 2014 judgment, saying that the new documents had ‘cast real doubt on the findings of financial impropriety’.

Dean-Verity made a subsequent appeal to the SRA for a review and the regulator has now decided to overturn its 2016 decision in full, including the rebuke.

The SRA said: ‘This is a case in which exceptional circumstances justify a review of a decision, notwithstanding the substantial elapse of time since the decision in question was made.

‘The SRA decision in 2016 was inextricably linked to the employment tribunal judgment in 2014. Given the recent revocation of the latter, we find that it is in the interests of justice to proceed with the review of the former at this juncture.’

Dean-Verity, who was called to the bar in 2018 and is now practising at Erimus Chambers in Luton, must take further action to overturn a £30,000 costs order imposed by the SDT in 2017. It is likely that any challenge will need to be made to the High Court.