A solicitor’s career has been ended after she tried to get a junior colleague to collude with her in lying to an opponent.
Kirsten Tomlinson, 43, formerly a family solicitor at Irwin Mitchell, emailed her legal executive colleague in September 2023 asking her to tell the other party in a family law case that a court application would only be withdrawn once he supplied certain documents.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal heard that in fact, there had been no application filed with the court. Tomlinson added in the email: ‘He doesn’t know we haven’t issued… we just led him to believe we did.’ The paragraph was signed off with an emoji smiling face.
A few days earlier, Tomlinson had emailed the opposing side herself, stating that her client’s application would remain in place until he signed a completed D81 form. The opposing side was unrepresented and had expressed how stressful he was finding the legal process.
Read more
Tomlinson’s colleague did not accede to the request to send a misleading email and instead spoke to a partner in the firm, as she felt uncomfortable about the email exchanges.
The firm called an immediate meeting with Tomlinson, where she accepted that no application had been made, that she had made an inaccurate statement to the opposing side and that she had acted before getting client instructions.
Zahra Pabani, her supervising partner, told her at this meeting: ‘We have lied to the other side, then said to a junior we are misleading him on purpose.’
Tomlinson said the client had wanted the matter resolved but added: ‘I’m so sorry. It’s stupid.’
She had been due to leave the firm two days later so no disciplinary action was required. Tomlinson moved to a position at Brabners LLP but left that firm in April last year.
Tomlinson, a solicitor since 2010, made an agreement with the Solicitors Regulation Authority in which she admitted all allegations against her including dishonesty.
In non-agreed mitigation, she pointed out these were two lapses in an otherwise 15-year unblemished career which were not reflective of her overall professional character.
The email to her colleague ‘looks horrific’, she conceded, and was sent in haste before she left the firm without thinking clearly.
The tribunal said the misconduct was not a one-off moment of madness, but instead an attempt to mislead the opposing party before compounding the issue by attempting to involve a colleague.
Tomlinson was struck off and agreed to pay £1,000 costs.
