Ex-Hogan Lovells partner jailed for three years over £1.27m fraud
30 May 2012 | By James Swift
Related Articles
Ex-Hogan Lovells partner jailed for three years
30 May 2012
Ex Hogan Lovells partner Grierson admits £1.27m expenses fraud
27 March 2012
The ex-Hogan Lovells partner facing jail
27 March 2012
Ex-Hogan Lovells partner struck off for £1.27m fraud
1 November 2012
Playing catch-up
15 November 2004
Those around him thought he was a shining example of a senior partner, always putting clients first and billing prodigious amounts. But today former Hogan Lovells partner Christopher Grierson was jailed for three years after pleading guilty to defrauding his firm of £1.27m.

Chris Grierson
The sentence was delivered after mitigation from Grierson’s defence counsel, QEB Hollis Whiteman’s Mark Ellison QC, who told the court how Grierson had been plagued by mental illness and driven to steal in a bid to maintain a stable home life amid reckless spending.
Grierson, who had been a litigation partner at the firm, began falsifying travel expenses at his firm in 2008, when he made false claims totalling £167,000. A year later this escalated to £526,785 and in 2010 he took £516,785. Last year, before the theft was uncovered, he took £63,611 between January and May.
In Southwark Crown Court this morning he was handed four sentences relating to four counts of fraud, one of 15 months, two of 36 months and one of 12 months, to run concurrently. He will serve half the three year sentence, with the remainder suspended. Grierson was also ordered to pay costs of £1,630.
Mitigating, Ellison told the court how Grierson had suffered from depression for many years and how he threw himself into his work to cope. Partner reviews from legacy firm Lovells between 2001 and 2009 described Grierson as an outstanding litigator with a prodigious workload - he billed 3,500 hours in one year - and “a model of how a senior partner should behave”. But cracks were beginning to show and the firm expressed concerns that Grierson was driving himself too hard – concerns that Grierson dismissed. He later agreed to see a psychiatrist linked to the firm.
Grierson’s state deteriorated when the BCCI case that he had worked on for more than 10 years collapsed in November 2005, leaving him with a sense of loss. In 2007 he was diagnosed with bi-polar disorder by a psychiatrist he had begun seeing.
At the same time, Grierson’s spending was spiralling out of control. The court heard from Ellison how Grierson had begun using prostitutes in 2003, but in 2006 this “entered into a different league” when he became infatuated with a Lebanese woman in New York. Grierson spent £630,000 on the woman, paying her rent and gifting her £280,000 in cash, among other things.
Grierson would later tell his psychiatrist that he knew the relationship was false and that he was a victim of manipulation, perhaps even a willing victim of manipulation.
Grierson began stealing from his firm in 2008 to continue the appearance of normality in his home life. Ellison admitted that Grierson could have solved his financial problems by selling his properties in England and France, but spoke about his desperation to avoid a similar experience to that of a few years before, when Grierson was forced to sell his UK home and downsize, putting strain on his relationship with his wife, with whom he is now in the middle of divorce proceedings.
It was also revealed in court that Grierson was only able to pay back what he had stolen from the firm when a close associate loaned him the money. He was able to pay back the associate following the sale of his property in France earlier this year.
Sentencing, Judge John Price took account of the fact that Grierson’s fraud was “well-planned and sophisticated” and obtained for him substantial sums, but added that the lawyer’s mental illness provided substantial mitigation. He quoted Grierson’s psychiatrist, who said that his illness impaired his judgement to the extent that he committed “social, sexual and financial indiscretions that were bound to be exposed”.
In a statement today, detective chief inspector Perry Stokes from the City of London Police, who led the investigation into Grierson, said: “Christopher Grierson’s greed was his downfall. He abused his status as a well-respected partner within a high profile law firm to steal more than a million pounds from the firm.
“This was a serious breach of trust and once he started offending, it was inevitable that he would come to our notice. The sentence passed today demonstrates how seriously the court views such cases.”
Grierson was dismissed from Hogan Lovells in 2011 after the fraud was detected (17 May 2011). As he had transferred the expenses to a dormant account, no client money had been affected.
The firm reported Grierson, a former equity partner on an annual profit share of more than £700,000, to the police in June 2011 after it recovered the stolen money (3 June 2011).
View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page


Readers' comments (38)
Anonymous | 30-May-2012 11:28 am
Is it fair that this man should get three years for a pre-meditated 3-year fraud totalling over a million pounds, whilst many of those involved in the spur-of-the-moment London riots received 2 year sentences for handling low-value stolen goods (e.g. primark t-shirts and blu-ray players)?
One rule for the rich.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anon | 30-May-2012 11:39 am
Yes I fully agree it should have been a much longer sentence. Lets hope that he does actually serve three years.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
John Smith | 30-May-2012 12:03 pm
Anonymous 1128, you're clearly a commie. I don’t know about you, but I would feel a lot safe with a city full of Grierson’s, as apposed to a city full of rioting thugs.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
laisez faire | 30-May-2012 12:11 pm
no one was actually hurt, so a fair sentence
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
nick | 30-May-2012 1:44 pm
So three years in jail but netting £1.2m (tax free) from the firm. An average of £400k per year....Gross that up with tax and it beats his salary...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anoint | 30-May-2012 1:55 pm
Presumably he had to steal the money so that his wife wouldn't notice how much he was spending on the mysterious "Lebanese woman."
There must be a moral in this.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
See you at the club next year Grierson what what! | 30-May-2012 2:05 pm
Thank goodness he was given a nice lenient sentence for swindling his colleagues out of vast sums of money.
Only a hateful communist would think he deserved anything more severe for his utterly dishonest thieving.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 30-May-2012 2:06 pm
@ 12:03
A: doesn't have a stake in society
B: has a £1m equity stake in Hogan Lovells
A & B decide to loot. Who should the courts come down hard on, assuming they stole goods to the same value (even though on the facts, there's a massive disparity)?
However, the public policy response is:
A: emergency through-the-night courts to mete out OTT sentences
B: an impotent (and soon to be defunct) SFO doing nothing & sympathetic courts giving a lenient sentence
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ex Insider | 30-May-2012 2:20 pm
There can't be many roles outside Law Firm Partner where you could make false claims at that level for so long before anyone noticed. If the FD is still the same, hope he has his story well rehearsed.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 30-May-2012 2:36 pm
i actually agree with comment no.1 one and i am not a commie. Without knowing anything beyond what i've read about the case in the press solicitors command a great deal of public trust. As officers of the court and whether one does criminal, civil, contentious or non-contentious work the penalty should be heavy for such dishonesty. After all, although most of the time it does not seem it to those in the profession, solicitors and barristers enjoy a great deal more direct and indirect power than the everyday man in the street
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment