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
Have your say
Related CPD/Events
Sign up for CPD/Events alerts-
How to use blogging, Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter in the legal sector - 7 CPD hrs
Smith & Smith PR
-
SRA Handbook: What you Need to Know
Legal Finance Professionals Limited
-
AFRICAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY FORUM
Management Forum


Readers' comments (38)
Billable Boris | 31-May-2012 2:42 pm
How is it possible to bill roughly 70 hours a week for an entire year, making a reasonable allowance for non-billable time each day?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
bob diamond | 31-May-2012 3:46 pm
I see from the above comments that the anti-capitalist brigade have mobilised! Yawn Yawn………. change the record Swampy
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Mdme F | 31-May-2012 5:26 pm
The key difference between Mr Grierson and the rioters is that he could afford a good lawyer. I also doubt whether he was really mentally ill - how coud someone who was bipolar bill 3500 chargeable hours? That is someone who is permanently manic. OCD or addictive personality or functioning psychopath perhaps. I have little sympathy for this chap - his wife clearly put up with being a lower priority than his career in exchange for lifestyle and for the sake of the kids (that he must never have seen a/way). S/one will want to hire him s/where and s/one as wealthy as that will pick up a new woman in no time. I am sure that he will re-appear as a GC s/where and will be a father again in a couple of years.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Interested Observer | 1-Jun-2012 12:44 pm
Capitalism is a economic system. Stealing is dishonest. The two are not the same, and condemning people like Grierson is not an indicator of left wing views - just strong moral principle.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 2-Jun-2012 0:20 am
Committ a crime pay the price! It just goes to show he has been claimed to be excellant lawyer and now all that hard work getting there just gone with reputation in tatters. I know i am studying to become a lawyer and if i ever get the chance to work for a big firm i would never throw it away.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 2-Jun-2012 11:17 am
His proven dishonesty makes his 3500 chargeable hours appear to be unlikely to have been honestly recorded. His perceptions of right and wrong were distorted, so his integrity in recording the time must be in issue. I don't believe anyone who says they do that much. I encountered another rogue partner claiming 3000 hours and it was ultimately proven to have been exaggerated by dodgy dumping of time on files. Experience shows that rogue partners rarely confine their dishonesty to a single type of activity.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 4-Jun-2012 12:05 pm
anonymous 30 may...soo how many of the rioters had bipolar disorder and were depressed?
this thing is getting down to people being prejudiced against a rich guy with problems, never mind the fact he had mental disorders :P
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Al | 12-Sep-2012 7:13 pm
I feel sorry for him, for the same reasons as all the other more compassionate/human commenters here. (Before anyone says anything else, I also feel sorry for the supposed "rioters" who got put in prison for wandering off with a bottle of water and such-like). I am flabbergasted that people are being so callous about a diagnosed mental illness as well.
What good is putting him in prison at all going to do? He's not dangerous, and he's highly unlikely to re-offend. And there is no real need for a deterrent sentence, as the loss of reputation and (relative) financial ruin is probably enough of a deterrent to stop other (non-mentally-ill) law firm partners from doing the same.
The one thing his prison sentence will do is cost the taxpayer a fair amount of money, of course... isn't it about £35k a year to keep someone in prison?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment