The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) v Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) v Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal

Mr Arslan was not an 'employee' under section 44D of the Solicitors Act 1974, so the SRA could not impose disciplinary sanctions under that provision. The Tribunal erred in law by applying the criminal standard of proof and substituting its own findings for those of the adjudicator in the section 43 review. The Tribunal's decision to revoke the section 43 order was irrational and should be quashed.

Parties
Claimant: Solicitors Regulation Authority; Defendant: Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal; Interested Party: Huseyin Arslan; Intervening Party: The Law Society
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review and Statutory Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
SRA's appeal under section 44E dismissed; judicial review claim allowed; Tribunal's decision to revoke section 43 order quashed.
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Standard of Proof, Employment Status, Judicial Review, Disciplinary Proceedings
Administrative Law Professional Regulation Statutory Interpretation Standard of Proof Employment Status Judicial Review Disciplinary Proceedings

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Solicitors Regulation Authority

Claimant

Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal

Defendant

Huseyin Arslan

Interested Party

The Law Society

Intervening Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review and Statutory Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Arslan was an 'employee' under section 44D of the Solicitors Act 1974
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal erred in substituting its own findings of fact for those of the adjudicator
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal erred in applying the criminal standard of proof

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Arslan was not an 'employee' under section 44D of the Solicitors Act 1974, so the SRA could not impose disciplinary sanctions under that provision. The Tribunal erred in law by applying the criminal standard of proof and substituting its own findings for those of the adjudicator in the section 43 review. The Tribunal's decision to revoke the section 43 order was irrational and should be quashed.

Court Disposition

SRA's appeal under section 44E dismissed; judicial review claim allowed; Tribunal's decision to revoke section 43 order quashed.

Orders

  • SRA's appeal against Tribunal's section 44E decision dismissed.
  • Permission granted for judicial review of Tribunal's section 43 decision.