• Application 11510-2016
• Reasons 27 January 2017
The SDT agreed to deal with the allegation against the second respondent (admitted 1973) by way of an agreed outcome. Accordingly, the SDT ordered that the second respondent should be reprimanded.
The allegation admitted by the second respondent was that he had failed, in the period March 2013 to March 2014, to keep the Al-Sweady clients properly informed as to the progress of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, and in particular as to the declining prospects of their allegations that cold-blooded executions had occurred at Camp Abu Naji. He had thereby breached principles 4, 5 and 6 of the SRA Principles 2011 and had failed to achieve outcome 1.12 of the Solicitors Code of Conduct 2011.
The admission made by the second respondent had been properly made, and the agreed outcome was a proportionate and proper basis for the resolution of the matter.
The second respondent was ordered to pay costs of £2,000.