- Application 11624-2017
- Admitted 1987
- Hearing 2 August 2017
- Reasons 7 September 2017
The SDT ordered that the respondent should be suspended from practice for an indefinite period from 2 August 2017.
By virtue of his conviction of the attempted murder of his wife, for which he had been sentenced to six years’ imprisonment, the respondent had breached principles 1, 2 and 6 of the SRA Principles 2011.
Although there had been some element of pre-planning, the respondent’s actions were not deliberate or calculated due to his ill-health. He had not concealed what he had done as he had called the emergency services immediately after the incident.
He had shown genuine insight and remorse. He had glowing references, and the victim impact statement from the criminal proceedings indicated that the victim was very supportive of him.
The medical reports confirmed that he had been affected by a medical condition at the material time. That had impacted enormously on his ability to conduct himself to the standards required of a reasonable solicitor.
There was a realistic prospect that the respondent could recover from his ill- health, respond to retraining and return to practice eventually. It would not be proportionate, in the light of the medical evidence provided, the excellent references and the fact that it was a single incident that had occurred due to the respondent’s ill-health, to permanently remove his ability to practise, thereby also depriving the public of a good solicitor.
The respondent’s medical condition at the time of the incident was a unique factor in the case and made it wholly exceptional. The appropriate and proportionate sanction was an indefinite suspension.
The respondent was ordered to pay cost of £3,309.