Solicitor fined for "vulnerable" client sexual relationship
A Scottish solicitor has been fined by the profession's Discipline Tribunal and ordered to pay compensation for entering into a sexual relationship with a vulnerable client for whom he continued to act professionally.
The case, details of which have been released by the tribunal without publishing names, to protect the interests of the complainers, involved a woman, "Ms AA", who was referred to the solicitor, "B", by an advice agency, "Org 1", in 2010 in relation to matrimonial separation and allegations of domestic abuse. B was a trusted adviser to whom Org 1 referred clients.
About a month after B began to act for Ms AA, the two began a sexual relationship. B, who was married with two children, continued to act for Ms AA for more than two months after that, during which time there were frequent sexual relations between them. Ms AA then instructed another solicitor but her relationship with B continued for 18 months in all, until February 2012.
The tribunal found B guilty of professional misconduct in respect of his entering into a sexual relationship with a vulnerable client referred to him by Org 1 and acting in a manner that raised issues as to his trustworthiness and placed into question his personal and /or professional integrity. Further, he had entered into a sexual relationship with a client who was vulnerable, thereby allowing his independence to be impaired, failing to act in the best interests of his client, allowing his own personal interests to influence his actings on behalf of his client, creating a potential conflict of interest between the interests of his client and his own, and failing in his duty of utmost trust and confidence.
The tribunal censured B and fined him £5,000. It also found that Org 1 was directly affected by B's professional misconduct and directed him to provide a verbal apology to the manager and the board of Org 1, to be followed up with a written apology. B was further ordered to pay Ms AA £250 in compensation.
It noted that Ms AA's complaint was not raised until the relationship had ended. However B was dealing with a vulnerable client and acting in a divorce action. He should have known better and committed a serious error of judgment by continuing to act. The tribunal did not consider that B acted improperly from a legal point of view as he just "kept matters ticking over". However the most serious aspect of B's misconduct was his breach of Org 1’s trust. This was very damaging to the reputation of the legal profession.