The Lawyer Asia Pacific 150 is the only research report to provide a ranking of the top 100 independent local firms and top 50 global firms in the region. The report offers critical review of some of the fastest growing firms and their strategies, a country-by-country guide to leading legal advisers and legal services market trends, plus exclusive insight into the current business development opportunities in the Asia Pacific. Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
IAN GORDON COCKBURN, 49, admitted 1969, practised as Cockburns, Brighton, struck off and ordered to pay £3,665 costs. Allegations substantiated he practised or held himself out as being entitled to practise without current practising certificate, failed to reconcile books of account, delivered accounts late, failed to keep accounts correctly, failed to pay client funds into client account, used client funds for own purposes. Cockburn previously before Tribunal in 1990 and 1994.
SIMON JAMES ERNEST EASTON, admitted 1972, practised with Calow Easton and under his own name from Croydon, struck off and ordered to pay £1,372 costs. Allegations substantiated he was jailed for 12 months after conviction at Southwark Crown Court on 5 September 1994 for three offences of false accounting. Offence involved agreement with dishonest client, to split £115,000 divorce bill on behalf of client into three parts, enabling client to dishonestly finance £44,000 of his own divorce costs via the commercial company he managed and its pension fund.
IAN STEWART BROWN-HOVELT, 49, admitted 1971, practised in partnership as Brown-Hovelt & Co, Hindhead, Surrey, fined £2,000.
Allegations substantiated he wrongly drew client money, breached accountancy rules relating to delivery of accounts and maintenance of books, practised without current practising certificate, failed to reply to letter from Solicitors Complaints Bureau, was guilty of delay in business, failed to account to clients and failed to deliver papers when requested.