A law firm director whose vulnerable client pleaded guilty to criminal charges when they were not fit to plead has been fined £3,800 by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
According to a regulatory settlement agreement published this week, Oliver Arthur D’Sa, admitted in 1984 and director of Leicester firm Oliver D’Sa, knew his client, ‘KI’, was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder when he represented him in relation to criminal charges.
At an online hearing which D’Sa did not attend but arranged for counsel to represent KI, his client pleaded guilty to the charges. Two months later, D’Sa received reports from a forensic psychiatrist and chartered psychologist that said KI presented with high levels of anxiety, suicidal ideation and features of a learning disability, and did not have the capacity to make a plea, form instructions for his solicitors, and would struggle to follow court proceedings.
The SRA said D’Sa put forward the findings of the reports to be factored into the sentencing, but did not ask the court to set aside KI’s plea. In 2022, KI’s new solicitors appealed against the convictions on the basis he was not fit to plead and his legal representatives failed in their representation of him. The appeal succeeded.
D’Sa admitted breaching the SRA’s code of conduct on taking account his client’s attributes, needs and circumstances. The SRA noted that D’Sa acted openly and honestly throughout the investigation, identified where things could have gone differently and altered his approach to subsequent clients.
The SRA said D’Sa had no intention to cause harm, and he identified training for himself and staff to improve their understanding of best practice in representing clients with learning and mental health difficulties. However, the SRA considered a fine appropriate because of the ‘serious harm’ to KI, who had a criminal conviction for four years, and D’Sa knowing from the outset his client was vulnerable.
D’Sa agreed to pay the SRA’s £600 investigation costs.
