A Swiss solicitor has been suspended from practice for two years after he breached anonymity orders imposed by the First-tier and Upper tribunals.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found three of the four allegations against Matthew Thomas Parish, admitted in September 2000, proved.
Parish was found to have: made complaints about his client's conduct to security and intelligence organisations and offered to retract them if the client paid his fees; published or allowed to be published press releases relating to his former client accusing them of fraud; and published decisions of the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal on his website in breach of anonymity orders.
The tribunal found that in breaching the court order, in offering to withdraw reports and in breaching the anonymity order Parish lacked integrity.
A further allegation of threatening legal action against a firm for making a report to the Solicitors Regulation Authority was found not proved.
Considering sanction, the SDT judgment said that Parish, who self-reported to the SRA, ‘showed no insight into his misconduct’.
It added: ‘He had also risked significant harm to Person A in publication of the Immigration Tribunal decisions in contravention of the anonymity order. The tribunal found that those publications, in breach of court orders were deliberate and were designed to cause the maximum possible harm. The tribunal found that Dr Parish had no regard to orders of the court.’
Read more
Referring to the press releases accusing his former clients of fraud in breach of a court order, the SDT said Parish’s actions ‘had caused harm’.
Parish’s offer to retract complaints he had made to security and intelligence organisations about his client’s conduct ‘was motivated by his desire to obtain payment of his fees and…to cause the maximum amount of aggravation to those whom he considered to have wronged him’.
The judgment said: ‘His actions were planned. He had acted in breach of the trust placed in him by his former clients, and in breach of the trust the public placed in solicitors to comply with orders of the court. He was an extremely experienced solicitor who was solely and wholly responsible for his conduct.’
Suspending Parish for two-years ‘reflected the seriousness of the misconduct’, the SDT said, adding: ‘The tribunal determined that the nature and seriousness of Dr Parish’s conduct was such that there was a need to protect both the public and the reputation of the legal profession from future harm by removing his ability to practise. Dr Parish’s lack of insight was such as to call into question his ability to continue practising appropriately.’
Parish was the manager and owner of Gentium Law Group SARL, a foreign law practice not regulated by the SRA, which closed in 2018. Parish has not held a practising certificate since 2018.
The SRA applied for £128,551.20 costs. However no costs order was made due to Parish’s ‘current and likely future means’.
