• Application 11543-2016
• Admitted 2012
• Hearing 9 February 2017
• Reasons 2 March 2017
By virtue of his conviction of conspiring to supply a controlled drug of Class A, cocaine, the respondent had breached principles 1, 2 and 6 of the SRA Principles 2011.
The fact that the respondent had received a custodial sentence was an indication of the gravity of his actions. The conduct which had led to his conviction was so serious that it would undermine public confidence in the profession if he were to be suspended.
While that conduct might not be repeated in the future, there was a need to protect the reputation of the legal profession and to uphold professional standards. The appropriate and proportionate sanction in the present case was to strike the respondent’s name from the roll.
The respondent was ordered to pay costs of £1,337.