Solicitor who made up client wins on Facebook escapes with six-month suspension

By on

Also practised for years without SRA authorisation

A solicitor who admitted to “inaccurate” Facebook posts boasting of wins in court that never happened has been suspended for six months.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) accepted that Irina Magdalena Schwab’s posts about fictional cases demonstrated a “lack of integrity” but not dishonesty.

The 46-year-old came to the regulator’s attention after applying for authorisation to run a law firm several years after starting it up.

She is a qualified solicitor, and began practising as Schwab & Co Legal Services Ltd in April 2015 — but didn’t apply for SRA registration until September 2019.

Schwab mentioned “a discussion she had at the SRA stand at LegalEx at London Olympia, following which she made the decision to register the firm as a regulated body”.

Officials checked the firm out and discovered several years’ worth of Facebook posts about its unauthorised legal activities. Most were carefully crafted to give the impression of client success without explicitly claiming anything — “we finish the week with a ‘successful visit’ to Basildon Magistrates Court” — but a handful mentioned specific cases.

These included:

“Colchester County Court, 2nd January 2018. Successful eviction hearing on behalf of a landlord by Schwab & Co”

“Double win today! Watford Family Court — successfully fought and suspended a prohibited steps order preventing a mother to leave the jurisdiction with the children. Milton Keynes County Court — successfully defended a set-aside application”

“Great result at Cambridge Magistrates Court! So pleased and proud to be able to represent our client, who eventually managed to prove her innocence!!!”

Questioned about whether or not the posts reflected real cases, Schwab admitted they were “just pure marketing” and “could be viewed” as misleading.

The 2022 Legal Cheek Firms Most List

SRA investigators concluded that “the posting of inaccurate and/or misleading information in these circumstances… where it would seem the intention was to create an impression that the firm was more active than in fact it was indicates a lack of integrity on the part of the respondent”. But they accepted, according to an agreed outcome lodged with the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, that “there is no evidence of dishonesty”.

In her settlement with the SRA, Schwab admitted several professional misconduct allegations to do with the Facebook posts and running an unregistered firm.

In mitigation, she argued that the breaches arose from genuine ignorance about the need to get her firm authorised before cracking into legal practice. The SRA broadly agreed that the failure to apply for authorisation and comply with money laundering rules were most likely down to her “lack of awareness of the regulatory requirements, rather than any attempt to avoid SRA scrutiny”.

Schwab, a British-Romanian dual national, also told the tribunal that she had grafted hard to become a solicitor, starting her studies in 2006 and qualifying as a legal executive in 2013 before finally being added to the roll in 2016 — all while working full-time for the CPS.

The SRA was willing to let her off with a fine, but the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal thought that too lenient. Schwab ultimately agreed to a six-month suspension, along with a two-year ban on running a firm and a £15,000 bill for costs.

For all the latest commercial awareness info, news and careers advice:

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Newsletter


Kirkland NQ

This is sad. I’ve never once boasted about the number of PE deals I’ve smashed on a daily basis and would never feel the need to show off about my model girlfriend, Chelsea townhouse or Lambo.



If she represents the standard of CPS staff it’s perhaps unsurprising that they are not well thought of! It’s not exactly reassuring to know that she was able to practise as a solicitor without being regulated.


Just Anonymous

I would say what I think about this, but I’m too busy right now.

I’m just updating my chambers profile to tell the world about my great victory in the Supreme Court, in which I single-handedly defeated Lord Pannick QC – with advocacy that Lord Reed PSC characterised as “sublime”.

An activity which, I understand, is not dishonest at all.



I think it’s totally fine cos that’s “pure marketing”.



If she represents the standard of CPS staff it’s perhaps unsurprising that they are not well thought of! It’s not exactly reassuring to know that she was able to practise as a solicitor without being regulated.



I think this is widespread. Many years ago I met a trainee who had spent his first two weeks at a firm I knew writing rave reviews on t’interweb. The firm was crap. I’ve never taken reviews for anything, anywhere seriously since and I commend this practice to all.


Anon; a Moose

Real lawyers rely on reputation and do not need to boast of successes.

In my experience, the best barristers are those with the shortest Chambers profiles!



I’m in Melbourne, Australia, and I had the misfortune to work with a lawyer who told a lot of people (although not me, can’t imagine why) that she was approached to be a High Court judge before she came to Australia. Given that she was a solicitor who did nothing special in a mid tier firm, it’s clearly nonsense, but people are too polite to tell her so. I wish there was someone we could report her. Wish there was somewhere we could report her for having a law degree under false pretences as well ie that she knows anything about the law.


Comments are closed.

Related Stories