Lydia Cleary
Employee
7025980

Decision - Employee-related decision

Outcome: Approval of employment (section 43)

Outcome date: 18 November 2024

Published date: 25 March 2025

Firm details

Firm or organisation at date of publication and at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: DAS Law Ltd

Address(es): DAS Parc, Greenway Court, Bedwas, Caerphilly, CF83 8DW Wales

Firm ID: 546782

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details

DAS Law Limited have been granted approval under section 43 of the Solicitors Act 1974 to employ Lydia Cleary as a paralegal, subject to the following conditions:

1. Ms Cleary's employment at the firm is limited to that described in the firm's application of 16 August 2024
2. Ms Cleary's supervision is as per the details provided to us in the firm's application of 16 August 2024 and supplementary email of 7 November 2024. This includes responsibility for Ms Cleary's daily supervision resting with Mr Shahab Akhtar, and in his absence, Mrs Rina Gokani Thomas. Mr Christopher Neill will have ultimate responsibility for Ms Cleary's work.
3. Ms Cleary does not have responsibility for receiving or holding client money, except for in the capacity outlined in the firm's application of 16 August 2024. She is not a signatory to any office or client account.
4. Ms Cleary is not responsible for supervising any other member of staff.
5. Any proposed variation to Ms Cleary's job description, duties, or arrangements as to her supervision are notified to the SRA in advance of the change taking place and the variation must not take place until permission is granted by the SRA.
6. This approval will lapse if Ms Cleary's employment with the firm is terminated.
7. This approval and the conditions attached to it are subject to review at the discretion of the SRA.

Reasons/basis

Ms Cleary was made subject to an order under section 43 of the Solicitors Act 1974 on 19 July 2024. In accordance with section 43 of the Solicitors Act 1974, any solicitor wishing to employ or remunerate her in connection with their practise as a solicitor must obtain our approval. The SRA is satisfied that the above employment will not put public confidence in the administration of justice and the provision of legal services or the interests of clients at risk.

Decision - Employee-related decision

Outcome: Control of non-qualified staff (Section 43 / Section 99 order)

Outcome date: 19 July 2024

Published date: 5 September 2024

Firm details

Firm or organisation at date of publication and at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: DAS Law Limited

Address(es): Trinity Quay, 2 Avon Street, Bristol, BS2 0PT

Firm ID: 423113

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details

Who does this decision relate to?

Lydia Cleary who works at DAS Law, Trinity Quay, 2 Avon Street, Bristol BS2 0PT (the firm).

A person who is or was involved in a legal practice but is not a solicitor.

Summary of decision

The SRA has put restrictions on where and how Ms Cleary can work in an SRA regulated firm. It was found that:

Ms Cleary, who is not a solicitor, is or was involved in a legal practice and has occasioned or been a party to an act or default which involved such conduct on her part that it is undesirable for her to be involved in a legal practice in any of the ways described in the order below.

The facts of the case

Ms Cleary is a paralegal at the firm, which is a licensed body.

On 8 January 2023 and 6 February 2023, Ms Cleary created attendance notes on a client file which suggested she had made telephone calls that in fact she had not made.

In doing so, Ms Cleary breached rule 1.4 of the Code of Conduct for Firms 2019 and Principles 2, 4 and 5 of the SRA Principles 2019.

Decision on outcome

An order pursuant to section 43(2) of the Solicitors Act 1974 was imposed as Ms Cleary's conduct meant that it was undesirable for her to be involved in a legal practice without the SRA's prior approval. The order pursuant to section 43 was made with effect from 28 days after the date of the letter or email notifying Ms Cleary of this decision.

Ms Cleary's conduct was serious because it was dishonest and showed a lack of integrity. The notes gave the misleading impression that Ms Cleary had worked on the file, which allowed Ms Cleary to move the file from her inactive list.

In mitigation, it was noted that the client had not suffered any loss as a result of the misconduct and, at the time of these events, Ms Cleary had raised concerns about her workload with her immediate supervisor at the firm.

Ms Cleary was also ordered to pay a proportion of the SRA's costs of £600.

What our Section 43 order means

1. no solicitor shall employ or remunerate her in connection with his/her practice as a solicitor;
2. no employee of a solicitor shall employ or remunerate her in connection with the solicitor's practice;
3. no recognised body shall employ or remunerate her;
4. no manager or employee of a recognised body shall employ or remunerate her in connection with the business of that body;
5. no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit her to be a manager of the body; and (vi) no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit her to have an interest in the body.

Except in accordance with the SRA's prior written permission.

SRA Standards and Regulations breached

SRA Code of Conduct for Firms 2019

Rule 1.4 You do not mislead or attempt to mislead your clients, the court or others, either by your own acts or omissions or allowing or being complicit in the acts or omissions of others (including your client).

SRA Principles 2019

Principle 2 You act in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the solicitors' profession and in legal services provided by authorised persons.

Principle 4 You act with honesty.

Principle 5 You act with integrity.