Introduction
Introduction
This is an appeal under section 24 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 against a decision of a Bar Tribunal and Adjudication Service (“BTAS”) disciplinary tribunal (“the Tribunal”) following a sanctions hearing on 16 December 2024. The Appellant had admitted a series of charges of misconduct of a sexual nature. By an oral judgment given at the end of the hearing and further written reasons dated 7 January 2025, sent to the Appellant on 11 February 2025, the Tribunal disbarred the Appellant from practice as a barrister.
The Bar Standards Board (“the BSB”) is the Respondent to the appeal, as the regulator which brought the disciplinary proceedings against the Appellant.
On 6 July 2025 an anonymity order was made such that the individuals who had complained of misconduct by the Appellant in the third and fourth set of disciplinary proceedings, a “mini-pupil” barrister and two pupil barristers, are to be known for the purposes of these proceedings as “Person A”, “Pupil A” and “Pupil B”. They had been granted the same anonymity in the BTAS proceedings. Accordingly, there must be no publication of any name, address, picture, or other information which may directly or indirectly lead to the identification of these individuals. I now make an identical order in relation to those who had complained about the Appellant in the first and second set of disciplinary proceedings, a male pupil and a female mini-pupil, referred to for the purposes of this appeal as “Pupil Y” and “Person X”.
The Appellant was represented on the appeal by Rossano Scamardella KC and the Respondent by Harini Iyengar. I was greatly assisted by the written and oral submissions of both counsel.
- Heading
- Introduction
- The factual background in overview
- Previous disciplinary proceedings involving the Appellant
- The November 2018 disciplinary hearing concerning misconduct in October 2017 (Case 2017/0431)
- The March 2021 disciplinary hearing concerning misconduct in January 2015 (Case 2019/0057)
- The facts of the two cases before the Tribunal
- (ii): Case 2021/4962
- The chronology of the investigation of the two cases before the Tribunal
- Submissions at the sanctions hearing on 16 December 2024
- The Findings of the Tribunal
- (i): Case 2020/0928
- (ii): Case 2021/4962
- The legal framework
- The grounds of appeal in overview
- Ground 1: Evidence of the Appellant’s rehabilitation
- Ground 2: The Appellant was afforded insufficient credit for the mitigating features listed in Annex 2 of the BTAS Sanctions Guidance
- Ground 3: The Tribunal failed to give any or sufficient consideration to the “totality” principle
- Ground 4: The Tribunal failed to give any or sufficient regard to the fact that the conduct complained of and the reporting of it occurred in 2018 and 2020, before the coming into force of the applica
- Ground 5: The Tribunal failed to explain why it had concluded that a long suspension was not a suitable sanction and the justice of the case was not met by disbarment, which is the sanction of last re
- Conclusions
![AC-2025-MAN-000091 - [2025] EWHC 2048 (Admin)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_fi51A75.png)