Wingate & Anor v The Solicitors Regulation Authority [2018] EWCA Civ 366 (07 March 2018)

Wingate & Anor v The Solicitors Regulation Authority [2018] EWCA Civ 366 (07 March 2018)

Dishonesty and lack of integrity are distinct concepts in solicitors' regulation; lack of integrity is a broader, objective standard not requiring subjective awareness of wrongdoing. The findings of the lower courts conflating the two were incorrect. The appeals of Wingate and Evans were dismissed, upholding the findings of lack of integrity and breaches of the Principles. The SRA's appeal in Malins was allowed in part, clarifying the law and remitting the case for reconsideration on the correct legal basis.

Citation
[2018] EWCA Civ 366
Parties
Appellant/1st Defendant: David Fenton Wingate; Appellant/2nd Defendant: Steven Edward Evans; Respondent (wingate/evans) & Appellant (malins): The Solicitors Regulation Authority; Respondent (malins): John Michael Malins
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment Following Appeals From High Court Decisions in Disciplinary Proceedings
Outcome
Wingate and Evans' appeals dismissed; SRA's appeal in Malins allowed in part; case remitted for reconsideration.
Legal Topics
Solicitors Regulation, Dishonesty, Integrity, Professional Misconduct, Sanctions, Interpretation of Professional Codes
Professional Discipline Legal Ethics Solicitors Regulation Dishonesty Integrity Professional Misconduct Sanctions Interpretation of Professional Codes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 17
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Fenton Wingate

Appellant/1st Defendant

Steven Edward Evans

Appellant/2nd Defendant

The Solicitors Regulation Authority

Respondent (wingate/evans) & Appellant (malins)

John Michael Malins

Respondent (malins)

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment Following Appeals From High Court Decisions in Disciplinary Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Meaning and distinction between 'dishonesty' and 'lack of integrity' in the context of solicitors' regulation
  2. 2 Whether the findings and sanctions imposed by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and High Court were correct in the cases of Wingate, Evans, and Malins
  3. 3 Procedural fairness in disciplinary proceedings, particularly regarding unpleaded allegations of dishonesty

Ratio Decidendi

Dishonesty and lack of integrity are distinct concepts in solicitors' regulation; lack of integrity is a broader, objective standard not requiring subjective awareness of wrongdoing. The findings of the lower courts conflating the two were incorrect. The appeals of Wingate and Evans were dismissed, upholding the findings of lack of integrity and breaches of the Principles. The SRA's appeal in Malins was allowed in part, clarifying the law and remitting the case for reconsideration on the correct legal basis.

Court Disposition

Wingate and Evans' appeals dismissed; SRA's appeal in Malins allowed in part; case remitted for reconsideration.

Orders

  • Findings of lack of integrity and breaches of Principles against Wingate and Evans upheld; sanctions (suspension, fine, costs) stand.
  • Malins' case remitted to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal for reconsideration on the correct legal basis, with dishonesty and lack of integrity to be treated as distinct.