Sheikh Asif Salam v Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd
[2024] EWHC 547 (Admin)
Farrukh Abbas v Solicitors' Regulatory Authority
6 November 2024
[2024] EWHC 2775 (Admin)
High Court
A solicitor was found guilty of making up a fake car accident claim to get money. Even though he said he was sorry, and there were some difficult things going on in his life, a court decided that he should lose his job as a solicitor because his actions hurt the public's trust in lawyers. The court agreed that taking away his job was the right punishment.
Key Facts
- •Farrukh Abbas (Appellant) appealed a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (Tribunal) decision to strike him off the Roll of Solicitors.
- •The Tribunal found three allegations of dishonesty proved against Abbas relating to a fabricated road traffic accident claim.
- •Abbas instructed and/or approved the pursuit of a false claim, signed a false witness statement, and provided misleading medical information.
- •The claim was ultimately unsuccessful, but Abbas admitted to intending to gain financially.
- •Abbas's appeal was filed significantly out of time, leading to a preliminary application for relief from sanctions.
- •The appeal challenged the Tribunal's decision on the grounds that exceptional circumstances were not adequately considered, the Tribunal erred in its assessment of Mr. Anjum's role and the level of harm caused, and the Tribunal did not properly assess Abbas's credibility considering his personal circumstances.
Legal Principles
Relief from sanctions
Denton v TH White Ltd [2014] WLR 3926
Standard of review for appeals against Tribunal decisions
CPR Part 52
Deference to Tribunal expertise
Assicurazioni Generali SpA v Arab Insurance Group [2003] 1 WLR 577; Gupta v GMC [2002] 1 WLR 1691
Approach to 'multifactorial' decisions
Bawa-Garba v GMC [2018] EWCA Civ 1879
Tribunal's approach to dishonesty in solicitors
Bolton v the Law Society [1994] 1 WLR 512
Integrity vs. Honesty
Wingate v SRA [2018] EWCA Civ 366
Test for dishonesty
Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd [2017] UKSC 67
Outcomes
Permission granted to file Appellant’s Notice out of time.
The court was persuaded by the serious consequences for the Appellant and his family, despite the significant delay.
Appeal dismissed.
The Tribunal's decision to strike off was justified given the serious dishonesty involved, lasting over nine months, and the need to protect public confidence in the legal profession. The Tribunal's consideration of mitigating factors, including Abbas's difficult family circumstances, was deemed appropriate and did not render the sanction disproportionate.