Patricia Rosaleen Scully, Alasdair James Brown and Steven Nacarlo

  • Application 11573-2016
  • Hearing 25 April 2017
  • Reasons 4 May 2017

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal ordered that the first respondent (admitted 1994) and the second respondent (admitted 1991) should each pay a fine of £10,000.

The SDT ordered that, as from 25 April 2017, except in accordance with permission in writing granted by the Law Society, no solicitor, recognised body or registered European lawyer should employ or remunerate the third respondent, and further that the third respondent should pay a fine of £5,000.

Between April 2014 and January 2015, the firm of SBW Lawyers, of which the respondents were each principals, breached rule 17.1(b)(ii) of the SRA Accounts Rules 2011 and principles 2, 6 and 10 of the SRA Principles 2011.

They failed to remedy those breaches promptly upon discovery and each thereby breached rule 7.1 of the rules and principles 2, 6 and 10.

Further, between March 2014 and January 2015 the firm of PR Scully, of which the first and second respondents were both principals, breached rule 17.1(b)(ii) of the rules and principles 2, 6 and 10.

The first and second respondents failed to remedy those breaches promptly upon discovery and each thereby breached rule 7.1 of the rules and principles 2, 6 and 10.

Further, the second respondent had, between March 2014 and January 2015, failed to meet his obligation as compliance officer for finance and administration to take all reasonable steps to ensure that the firms and their managers and employees complied with any obligations imposed upon them under the rules, thereby breaching rule 8.5(e)(i) of the SRA Authorisation Rules 2011.

In the circumstances, it was reasonable to make an order on the basis of the statement of agreed facts and outcome submitted by the parties, namely a fine of £10,000 for the first and second respondents, and in respect of the third respondent a fine of £5,000 and an order under section 43(2) of the Solicitors Act 1974.

The respondents were ordered to pay costs of £15,000 on the basis of joint and several liability, such sum not to be enforced without leave following the determination of the partnership voluntary arrangement with liberty to apply.