England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions

ON APPEAL FROM THE LAW SOCIETY

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL Tuesday 12 February 2002

1. LORD PHILLIPS, MR: Miss Rosser appears in person before me to appeal against the decision of the review panel of the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors ("OSS"). Under that decision, which was communicated to her on 24 October 2001, her Practising Certificate has been made subject to conditions. She seeks to have those conditions removed.
2. Miss Rosser qualified as a solicitor with Jordans of Doncaster where she practised as a solicitor from 1991 to 1995. She was made a partner in 1992. Between November 1995 and January 1997 she was an equity partner at Beresford & Long in Doncaster. She then moved to London and between July 1997 and August 1999 she worked as an assistant solicitor with Norton Rose. In September 1999 she left them and went back North, in circumstances which I shall describe in more detail, to join Walker Morris of Leeds as an associate solicitor. She then left that firm to join Halliwell Landau in Manchester as an assistant solicitor until 15 December 2000 at which date she left and ceased to practise as a solicitor.
3. While she was in London working for Norton Rose, her husband left her and she found herself faced with outgoings that she had difficulty in meeting. That resulted in her moving back North in an attempt to resolve the situation. Unfortunately, she did not succeed in doing so and on 21 June 2001, quite properly, she wrote to the OSS to inform them that a petition for bankruptcy had been issued against her. She was adjudicated bankrupt on 6 August 2001. At that point she had an unconditional Practising Certificate for the year 2000/2001. Under section 15(1) of the Solicitors Act 1974 an adjudication of bankruptcy automatically results in the suspension of a Practising Certificate. In those circumstances a solicitor can apply to have the certificate reinstated, which is what Miss Rosser did.
4. Her case was considered in the normal way by a case worker at the OSS who recommended that the automatic suspension should be terminated but subject to the imposition of a condition on the Practising Certificate as follows:

"... she may act as a solicitor only in employment which is approved by the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors in connection with the imposition of that condition, and that she is not an office holder and/or director/shareholder of an incorporated solicitor's practice and that she does not hold or receive client money."

5. This recommendation was made in the interests both of the public and of the profession. The case worker directed that it should remain on Miss Rosser's Practising Certificate until the next Practising Certificate after her discharge in bankruptcy, at which point it would be appropriate for the OSS to reconsider the position. That recommendation was accepted by the adjudicator who resolved to give effect to it on 11 September 2001.
6. Miss Rosser then applied to have that decision reviewed by the review panel but on 24 October, having considered her application, they wrote to her with their decision in the following terms:

"1. The Panel considered as a preliminary issue Ms Rosser's request for an oral hearing and decided that there was sufficient information before it to make a decision on the papers before them.

2. The Panel carefully considered the grounds of the application for review submitted by Ms Rosser in her letter of 13 September 2001 but RESOLVED to dismiss the application. The Reasons were that the Panel considered that the condition was necessary to protect the interests of the public. The Panel acknowledged Ms Rosser's reasons that it may affect her ability to gain employment with one of the firms to which she intends to apply and also that the bankruptcy was not in the course of her practising as a solicitor or of any impropriety with respect to her practising as a solicitor, however, in all circumstances the Panel were satisfied that the decision reached by the Adjudicator at First Instance was correct and the condition was justified and desirable."

7. In her petition to me, which was admirably succinct, Miss Rosser made the following points:

"I was Bankrupt due to circumstances arising out of the breakdown of my marriage and being left in debt to a rental liability following the departure of my ex-husband.

I was subsequently pursued by Citibank who sought Bankruptcy against me.

I wish to make absolutely clear that this has had nothing to do with my Practice as a solicitor.

In support of that I can confirm that I was previously the Compliance Partner at Beresfords Solicitors of Doncaster.

My recent working history demonstrates a track record of working at substantial commercial Practices dealing only with commercial work. I do not believe I will be able to obtain employment with any such firm with a conditional certificate.

I understand the need to protect the public in cases of Solicitor impropriety but the Law Society accept there is no suggestion of this in my case.

In all the circumstances I ask His Lordship to review my Appeal and to say that it is just and equitable that I receive a Practising Certificate without Conditions."

8. Miss Rosser has elaborated on the circumstances in which she was made bankrupt. Her husband was a wealthy man and they had a joint tenancy of a flat at a high rent of £660 per week. Her husband then left her and ceased to make any contributions towards this rent. Try as she might over the months that followed it did not prove possible to extract any contribution from him to meet her obligations.
9. She moved to the North again in an attempt to earn sufficient to meet those obligations but found she could not do so. She borrowed the sum of some £20,000, but then found herself unable to meet the interest payable on that loan. She was working extremely long hours in her new practice but at the same time was being constantly pursued by Citibank who were seeking an appropriate arrangement to discharge her indebtedness. Just before Christmas she felt she could not continue in practice as the pressures on her were too much. Having ceased to practise, her income ceased and her problems became worse confounded.
10. A possible solution was offered to her by her mother who was prepared to mortgage her home in order to prevent her daughter being made bankrupt. But, after giving careful consideration to that offer, Miss Rosser decided that would not be an appropriate course to take. In the event there was no alternative but to become bankrupt.
11. Miss Rosser has emphasised to me, and this is common ground, that her bankruptcy involved no want of care in her professional capacity let alone any impropriety. It was simply the inability to discharge her personal debts. She is desperately keen to regain employment as a solicitor. She had worked her way up in the profession from a humble start. If she has to apply for a post with qualifications on her certificate, that will make it difficult, if not impossible, for some of the firms to which she aspires to offer her employment.
12. For the Law Society Mr David Barton has also been succinct. The Law Society accepts that Miss Rosser's bankruptcy does not flow from anything she has done in a professional capacity, but the adjudicator will have taken that into account in lifting the suspension. The conditions being placed on her certificate are not punitive, they are regulatory and they reflect the fact that the public do not expect a solicitor in practice without supervision to be an undischarged bankrupt.
13. Mr Barton's submission reflects the fact that the primary duty of the OSS in a case such as this is to have regard to the interests of the public and to the standing of the profession in the eyes of the public. The public would rightly be concerned if an undischarged bankrupt was permitted to practise as a solicitor without supervision.
14. Miss Rosser's bankruptcy has nothing to do with the manner in which she is carrying out her professional activities. Her professional reputation is of the highest standard. The Law Society has made it plain that there is no question of impropriety and that is a matter she can quite properly put before any prospective employer. Her bankruptcy resulted from a stage where she was no longer able, because of the pressures on her, to look after her personal affairs adequately. In my judgment, the decision of the OSS to lift the suspension on her Practising Certificate immediately properly reflected the position, but only because of the conditions they imposed upon her certificate.
15. I sympathise personally with Miss Rosser, but I am firmly of the opinion that the decision that was reached and confirmed by the OSS was the appropriate decision.
16. In those circumstances I must dismiss her appeal.