Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.
i think that the issue is one of proportionality as someone else has pointed out on this thread. I hope the High Court comes down on the side that not every instance of dishonesty needs to result in a striking off. If the punishment was proportionate then we would not see instances of the SRA fudging the issue of dishonesty- I say this hesitantly but there are reported cases and decisions were dishonesty could have been alleged and was not. I do not believe that what Ms James did, whilst serious is as bad as stealing money from a client (which should invariably lead to a striking off) and so I think that there should be a differential (even without her ill health). Maybe it is a good thing for the High Court to rule on the issue.
The Gazette offers you up-to-the-minute national and international news, opinion, features, in-depth articles plus a jobs and appointments section.
Please click the link below for a digital edition
The Law Society is the independent professional body for solicitors. We represent and support our members, promoting the highest professional standards and the rule of law.
Find out more about the benefits of membership
Find out more about the Law Society
The Professional Development Centre provides webinars and training to meet the learning and developmental needs of legal professionals.
We run PDC training seminars, conferences and networking events for our members.
Law Society Publishing titles, e-books and selected key works from other legal publishers.
It brings you quick, access to the library catalogue and value added legal information sources.
© 2019 The Law Society all rights reserved
Site powered by Webvision