Tribunal urges lawyers to seek help before matters ‘spiral out of control’
A former associate at Irwin Mitchell has avoided a career-ending strike-off after deleting a chain of emails in a “moment of madness”, as the disciplinary tribunal urged lawyers who find themselves in similar difficulties to seek appropriate help before matters “spiral out of their control”.
The disciplinary proceedings against Heather Roberts came after a client who was involved in a will validity dispute, complained that particulars of claim (PoC) had been substantially amended without their barrister’s approval.
After a partner at the firm asked Roberts for a full breakdown of the PoC history, the SRA alleged that she deleted five email chains from the case management system. These emails showed her involvement in the PoC and included correspondence between her and a colleague she was supervising.
The deleted emails were easily recovered from the client file’s recycle bin, leading the tribunal to conclude that this was not a “sophisticated attempt” to conceal her involvement.
She denied all the allegations against her.
Roberts, who qualified in 2007, did not dispute deleting the emails but said she didn’t remember doing so, as she had been in a “haze” caused by deteriorating health due to the firm’s “demanding” working conditions.
The solicitor said she had trusted a colleague to send the changes to the barrister for approval but hadn’t “ensured” this had actually happened.
Other issues had apparently arisen with the same colleague’s files, and she told the tribunal “this was ‘the last straw’”.
Roberts was signed off with stress in January 2022, and the firm reported her to the regulator the following month. She left Irwin Mitchell in February 2022 “by mutual agreement”.
The tribunal found the allegations proven but chose not to strike Roberts from the roll, accepting that it was a “moment of madness”. While she had been dishonest on this occasion, the tribunal held that this did not make her a dishonest person.
The tribunal opted instead to impose 12 month suspension and ordered her to pay nearly £25,000 in costs.
“The character evidence pointed completely to the reverse and in all other respects she was a highly regarded solicitor,” the tribunal said. “It was hoped that the respondent would be able to pick up her career once the period of suspension ended.”
The tribunal also took the opportunity to urge “people in similar circumstances to ensure that they sought appropriate help before matters spiralled out of their control”.
(
(
