A solicitor has failed to challenge findings made against him by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal after the High Court found there was ‘no proper basis’ to extend time to appeal by five-and-a-half years.
Zeeshan Mian, admitted in 2007, was found by the SDT to have failed to carry out identity checks on a consultant whom he accepted as a qualified barrister but had been disbarred following a conviction for fraud two years earlier.
Mian was fined £20,000 and conditions imposed on his practice for a period of two years, commencing in December 2019. He was also ordered to pay £25,000 costs.
In seeking to appeal, Mian argued that the SDT ‘had no jurisdiction to determine the allegations against him or to impose any sanctions upon him’ as the complaints against him had been ‘finally determined’ by the Solicitors Regulaiton Authority. Mian filed his appeal in September 2025 – more than five-and-a-half years after the 21-day time limit had elapsed. The limit expired in February 2020.
Robert Palmer KC, sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court, described the delay as ‘both serious and significant’. Dismissing the application for an extension of time, the judge said: ‘There would have to be very compelling reasons to justify such an extension. Here there are none.’
Documents relied on by Mian ‘do not establish even an arguable case that the initial referral of disciplinary proceedings to the SDT in 2018 was unlawful and that time should be extended for [Mian] to bring this appeal’, the judgment said.
Refusing Mian’s application to extend time to appeal, the judge said: ‘Evaluating all the relevant factors together, including the seriousness of the delay, the lack of good reason for it, and the need to deal justly with the application, including the need for litigation to be conducted efficiently and at proportionate cost and to enforce compliance with rules, practice directions and orders, there is no basis for me to extend time to bring this appeal.
‘Even if I were otherwise persuaded to extend time, I would dismiss the appeal on its merits. The referral to the SDT was lawfully made, and the SDT had had full jurisdiction to determine the matter before it and to make such orders as it saw fit.’
Mian was struck off the roll of solicitors in September 2026 after he was found to have hidden regulatory information from the Bar Standards Board. The judgment noted his appeal against that decision ‘remains pending before the High Court’.
