ROBERTS Philip Bradley

Roberts, Philip Bradley

Date

03 April 2014

Charges

The charge against Mr Roberts was:

1: Failing to maintain high standards of professional and personal conduct and/or failure to comply with the Solicitors Conduct Rules contrary to principle 2 (and/or the obligation to comply with other Codes) of the Code of Conduct for CILEx members. 

The particulars to this charge were:

Between in or about September 2006 and 30 September 2010,  Mr Roberts, a Fellow of CILEx, then employed by Wilson Cowie & Dillon of 10 Duke Street, Liverpool, L1 5AS,:-   

(i)  Contrary to Rules 1.02, 1.04, 1.05 and 1.06 of the Solicitors Conduct Rules 2007 (SCR) failed to disclose material information to lender clients;

(ii) Contrary to Rules 1.02, 1.04, 1.05 and 1.06 of the SCR failed to disclose material information to his purchaser clients;

(iii) Contrary to Rules 3.01(1) and (2)(a) of the SCR acted where there was a conflict or a significant risk of conflict of interests between two or more clients;

(iv) Contrary to Rules 3.01(1) and (2)(b) of the SCR acted where there was a conflict of interests between his own interests and those of clients and/or failed to advise his clients to seek independent legal advice; and

(v) Contrary to Rules 1.02, 1.04, 1.05 and 1.06 of the SCR signed and submitted Certificate(s) of Title to lender clients in which he described himself as a “partner” when he was neither a partner or solicitor.

in consequence of which on 4 February 2013 the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal made an order pursuant to section 43 of the Solicitors Act 1974 that:- 

(i)   no solicitor shall employ or remunerate him in connection with his practice as a solicitor;

(ii)      no employee of a solicitor shall employ or remunerate him in accordance with the solicitor’s practice;

(iii)     no recognised body shall employ or remunerate him;

(iv)     no manager or employee of a recognised body shall employ or remunerate him in connection with the business of that body; 

(v)     no recognised body or manger or employee of such body shall permit him to be a manager of the body; and

(vi)    no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit him to have an interest in the body. 

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal further ordered Mr Roberts to pay the costs of and incidental to the application and enquiry fixed in the sum of £20,000, such costs not to be enforced without leave of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.

Outcome

The charges were found proved.

Sanction

The Disciplinary Tribunal ordered that Mr Roberts be excluded from membership of CILEx for 5 years.

Appeal

Mr Roberts appealed the decision of the Disciplinary Tribunal.  The appeal was unsuccessful.