AC-2025-MAN-000091 - [2025] EWHC 2048 (Admin)

Both parties had referred the Tribunal to the previous disciplinary proceedings involving the Appellant, for different reasons. The BSB had relied on them as a relevant aggravating factor. Mr Scamardella KC had argued on behalf of the Appellant that the BSB’s investigation and conduct of the 2020 case had been dilatory and unhelpful and that this had caused serious prejudice to the Appellant by depriving him of the opportunity to have that case dealt with in 2021 and for the sanctions to have been “rolled up”. He had urged the Tribunal to bear in mind the delay for which he criticised the BSB when deciding the appropriate sanction: [13]. It is therefore necessary to set out the allegations and outcome of the previous disciplinary proceedings involving the Appellant in a little detail, as the Tribunal did at [14]-[22].