• Application 11640-2017

• Admitted 1997

• Hearing 26 September 2017

• Reasons 27 October 2017

The SDT ordered that the respondent should be struck off the roll.

By virtue of his conviction on 12 August 2016 of two counts of making an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child, the respondent had breached principles 1, 2 and 6 of the SRA Principles 2011.

The respondent had failed to notify the SRA of his conviction within seven days of being convicted and had thereby breached principle 7 of the principles and regulation 15.1(b) of the SRA Practising Regulations 2011.

The respondent’s conduct involved an extremely serious criminal offence which had exploited vulnerable children, and it had been repeated.

The respondent had a previously long unblemished record and he had cooperated with the regulator, making early admissions to his behaviour. He had shown genuine remorse and insight and had spoken candidly before the SDT. It was clear the conviction had had a profound effect on the respondent.

The seriousness of the misconduct was such that nothing short of an order striking the respondent off the roll would be sufficient to protect the public and the reputation of the legal profession. The respondent was ordered to pay costs of £1,524.