Decisions and interventions

The SDT ordered that the respondent should be suspended from practice for six months from 27 February 2025. 

While in practice as a solicitor, the respondent had pursued a course of conduct which had amounted to the stalking of person A and which he knew or ought to have known had amounted to the harassment of her, in that he had repeatedly made contact and sent her unsolicited items, contrary to section 2A(1) and (4) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, thereby breaching principles 2 and 5 of the SRA Principles 2019. 

The respondent had been convicted in the magistrates’ court on his guilty plea of an offence under section 2A(1) and (4) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and had been sentenced to, inter alia, a 12-month community order with a rehabilitation activity requirement of 10 days. 

The parties had invited the SDT to deal with the allegations against the respondent in accordance with a statement of agreed facts and proposed outcome annexed to the judgment. 

The SDT had reviewed all the material before it and was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the respondent’s admissions had been properly made.

The SDT had noted the sentence imposed by the magistrates’ court, in particular the imposition of a low-level community penalty. The respondent’s conduct had been planned and had continued over a period of time. His conduct, as admitted by him, was in material breach of his obligation to protect the public and the reputation of the profession. He was solely responsible for the circumstances of his misconduct and his culpability was high. 

There was a need to protect the public and the reputation of the profession from future harm, but such protection did not necessitate the respondent being indefinitely suspended from practice or struck off the roll. 

A fixed suspension for a period of six months was appropriate and proportionate to the respondent’s misconduct and also provided the requisite level of protection for the public and the reputation of the profession. 

The respondent was ordered to pay costs of £2,096.

On 23 April 2025, an adjudicator resolved to intervene into the above-named licensed body, formerly of 165 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2DY.

The ground for intervention was: a relevant insolvency event occurred in relation to the firm when it was a licensed body – paragraph 2(c) of Schedule 14 to the Legal Services Act 2007.

Chris Evans of Lester Aldridge LLP of Russell House, Oxford Road, Bournemouth BH8 8EX (tel: 01202 786341; email: interventions@LA-Law.com) has been appointed to act as intervention agent.

The intervention notices were served on the former managers of the firm on 24 April. 

On 24 April 2025, the SRA intervened into the practice of Dorothy Turner and the licensed body, Deo Volente Legal LLP, trading as D V Solicitors, at Elder House, 504-506 Elder Gate, Milton Keynes MK9 1LR.

The grounds for intervention into the practice of Dorothy Turner were:

• There was reason to suspect dishonesty on the part of Turner in connection with her practice as a solicitor – paragraph 1(1)(a)(i) Schedule 1 Solicitors Act 1974 (as amended).
• Turner had failed to comply with rules – paragraph 1(1)(c) Schedule 1 Part I Solicitors Act 1974.

The grounds for intervention into Deo Volente Legal LLP (the firm) were: 

• There was reason to suspect dishonesty on the part of Turner, as a manager of the firm, in connection with the firm’s business – paragraph 1(2)(d)(i) Schedule 14, Legal Services Act 2007. 
• One or more of the terms of the firm’s licence had not been complied with – paragraph 1(2)(a) Schedule 14, Legal Services Act 2007.

Turner’s practising certificate was suspended as a result of the intervention decision.

Richard Thorpe of Shakespeare Martineau SHMA SRA Interventions, PO Box 18228, Birmingham B2 2HX (tel: 0300 247 2470; email: interventions@shma.co.uk) has been appointed to act as intervention agent.

On 14 May 2025, the SRA intervened into the remainder of the firm, DMJ Solicitors Limited, formerly of Office 2-3, 299 Kensington Liverpool, Liverpool L7 2RG. The sole director of DMJ Solicitors Ltd, Rosemary Asiwe, died on 6 August 2023.

The ground for intervention was: it was necessary to intervene to protect the interests of clients or former clients, the interests of beneficiaries of any trust of which the firm is or was a trustee, or the interests of the beneficiaries of any trust of which a person who is or was a manager or employee of the firm is or was a trustee in that person’s capacity as a manager or employee – paragraph 32(1)(e) of Schedule 2 to the Administration of Justice Act 1985.

No intervention agent has been appointed.