header-logo header-logo

13 June 2012
Issue: 7518 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Conditions must stand

Solicitor loses case over conditions on his practising certificate

A solicitor who requested that conditions on his practising certificate be replaced by undertakings to avoid high insurance premiums has lost his appeal at the High Court.

Hugh Bryant was suspended from practice after he made a protected disclosure to NCIS about an American client. Once his suspension ended, in 2008, he was granted a series of practising certificates subject to conditions but was unable to find work due to increased professional indemnity premiums. Consequently, Bryant asked the court to replace the conditions with undertakings.

Delivering judgment in Bryant v Solicitors Regulation Authority [2012] EWHC 1475 (Admin), Mr Justice Eady acknowledged that “the imposition of conditions is now in practical terms recognised to be the ‘kiss of death’”. “To all intents and purposes they render the prospects of further practice impossible,” he said.

Eady J also recorded the facts Bryant made no personal gain from acting for the American client, and that “an old and respected City firm” had acted for the American client for a number of years before Bryant took over.

However, he ruled that it would be “quite inappropriate” to let the state of the professional indemnity insurance market influence his decision. Dismissing the appeal, he held that the five conditions were “sensible and directed towards proper objectives”.

Issue: 7518 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll