Skip to content
Law Society of Scotland
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
  • For members

    • For members

    • CPD & Training

    • Membership and fees

    • Rules and guidance

    • Regulation and compliance

    • Journal

    • Business support

    • Career growth

    • Member benefits

    • Professional support

    • Lawscot Wellbeing

    • Lawscot Sustainability

  • News and events

    • News and events

    • Law Society news

    • Blogs & opinions

    • CPD & Training

    • Events

  • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying as a Scottish solicitor

    • Career support and advice

    • Our work with schools

    • Lawscot Foundation

    • Funding your education

    • Social mobility

  • Research and policy

    • Research and policy

    • Research

    • Influencing the law and policy

    • Equality and diversity

    • Our international work

    • Legal Services Review

    • Meet the Policy team

  • For the public

    • For the public

    • What solicitors can do for you

    • Making a complaint

    • Client protection

    • Find a Solicitor

    • Frequently asked questions

    • Your Scottish solicitor

  • About us

    • About us

    • Contact us

    • Who we are

    • Our strategy, reports and plans

    • Help and advice

    • Our standards

    • Work with us

    • Our logo and branding

    • Equality and diversity

  1. Home
  2. For members
  3. Journal Archive
  4. Issues
  5. November 2016
  6. Scottish Solicitors' Discipline Tribunal

Scottish Solicitors' Discipline Tribunal

Reports relating to Craig Richard Grimes; Michael Dryden Kerr and Martin Young Kerr
14th November 2016

Craig Richard Grimes

A complaint was made by the Council of the Law Society of Scotland against Craig Richard Grimes, solicitor, Anthony Mahon Ltd, Glasgow. The Tribunal found the respondent guilty of professional misconduct in respect of his unconscionable delay for a 28-month period and ultimately his failure to raise a divorce action and repeatedly misleading his client as to progress of the action; his failure during a six-month period to reply to correspondence from a fellow solicitor in respect of that same client and during an eight month period to implement a mandate from that same client authorising him to pass her file and all related papers to her new solicitors.

The Tribunal censured the respondent and directed in terms of s 53(5) of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 that for a period of two years any practising certificate held or issued to him shall limit him to acting as a qualified assistant to such employer as may be approved by the Council of the Law Society of Scotland or its Practising Certificate Subcommittee. The Tribunal also ordained the respondent to pay £1,500 compensation to the secondary complainer.

The Tribunal was of the view that the respondent’s initial failure to progress instructions to raise a divorce action for three years was compounded by his misleading his client as to the progress of that matter and his subsequent failures to both deal appropriately with the mandate and then correspond with her new solicitor. The Tribunal was concerned that the respondent had not been honest with his client over a prolonged period of time while holding a senior position in the firm, and in view of this considered it necessary for the protection of the public to restrict his practising certificate. The Tribunal however noted that the respondent had shown a degree of insight into his failures by cooperating with the Society, offering an apology and offering compensation to his former client.

Michael Dryden Kerr and Martin Young Kerr

A complaint was made by the Council of the Law Society of Scotland against Martin Young Kerr and Michael Dryden Kerr, formerly of McClure & Partners, 199 St Vincent Street, Glasgow. The Tribunal found the respondents guilty of professional misconduct in cumulo in respect of their failure to comply with rules B6.3.1(a), B6.4.1, B6.7.1, B6.7.4 and B6.13 of the Law Society of Scotland Practice Rules 2011. The Tribunal suspended both respondents from practice for a period of five years.

The Accounts Rules are in place in order to provide protection to the public. Solicitors are in a privileged position of holding monies belonging to others. It is well accepted that the Tribunal will treat breaches of the Accounts Rules as a serious matter. The question here was whether the breaches proved here individually amounted to professional misconduct. The test to be satisfied is that the conduct represents a departure from the standards to be expected of a competent and reputable solicitor that would be regarded as serious and reprehensible. The evidence relating to the breaches of rules B6.3.1(a) and B6.4.2, which ran together, reflected a deliberate course of conduct by the respondents. Over a four-month period, money was removed from the client account, putting it into deficit, and then shortly before the month end, money was transferred back to put it back into surplus. This represented deliberate breaches of the rules, executed in such a way that suggested full knowledge on the part of the respondents. In these circumstances the appropriate disposal was one of suspension of both respondents from practice. Such a step was necessary to underline the importance of the protection of the public and to maintain public trust in the profession. The Tribunal concluded that the appropriate period for suspension was five years.

www.ssdt.org.uk

Share this article
Add To Favorites
https://lawware.co.uk/

In this issue

  • Insider lists: the new must-do
  • Pensions valuation and the “relevant date”
  • Data: blurring the lines between privacy and risk?
  • IT: the proficiency and the gaps
  • Reading for pleasure
  • Opinion: Peter Boyd
  • Book reviews
  • Profile
  • President's column
  • The Keeper steps in
  • People on the move
  • Beyond Yes and No: Britain after Brexit
  • Brexit: leaving European judicial space
  • Timed out? Alternative financial claims by cohabitants
  • The end of the cash ISA?
  • We need to talk about Beatrice
  • Global players
  • Digital: the dark side
  • Cautionary tale
  • Married to the land? – appealed
  • Pregnancy: the unequal burden
  • Privacy: strictures and safeguards
  • Trapped employers – relief any time soon?
  • Scottish Solicitors' Discipline Tribunal
  • Convenient, but necessary?
  • Is there a lawyer in the house?
  • From the Brussels Office
  • Law reform roundup
  • Master Policy: the new team moves in
  • The "buzz" of mediation
  • Plan into action
  • Sorry: the hardest word, made easier
  • Ask Ash
  • Appraising: what's your score?
  • Paralegal pointers

Recent Issues

Dec 2023
Nov 2023
Oct 2023
Sept 2023
Search the archive

Additional

Law Society of Scotland
Atria One, 144 Morrison Street
Edinburgh
EH3 8EX
If you’re looking for a solicitor, visit FindaSolicitor.scot
T: +44(0) 131 226 7411
E: lawscot@lawscot.org.uk
About us
  • Contact us
  • Who we are
  • Strategy reports plans
  • Help and advice
  • Our standards
  • Work with us
Useful links
  • Find a Solicitor
  • Sign in
  • CPD & Training
  • Rules and guidance
  • Website terms and conditions
Law Society of Scotland | © 2025
Made by Gecko Agency Limited