The Lawyer’s new China Elite report contains the most detailed research available on the PRC legal market and contains unparalleled insight into the country's leading law firms. They vary in size, practice focus and geographic coverage, but they all share one common quality – ambition... Read more
An exhaustive analysis of the UK market including every firm in the top 200 ranked, analysed and benchmarked, UK chambers ranked by turnover, revenue per barrister and which international firms are most active in the UK.
Clive James Coble, 36, admitted 1987, practising from April 1993 in partnership as Roger Brooker & Co in New London Road, Chelmsford, Essex, struck off and ordered to pay costs of £680. Allegation substantiated that he had been convicted of offences of dishonesty and sentenced at Chelmsford Crown Court to eight months imprisonment. Tribunal said the damage which he had done to the reputation of the profession was incalculable.
Jennifer Griffiths, solicitors clerk of Thornton Heath, Surrey, employed at material time or otherwise associated with Peter Thompson, solicitor, of London SW9 and Hanoman & Co of Cheam, Surrey, banned from employment by any solicitor without written consent from the Law Society and ordered to pay costs of £2,831. Allegations substantiated that she removed documents belonging to clients, acted for clients of the firm without their knowledge, approval or authority and used forged note paper of the firm. Tribunal noted her assertion that she had carried out work complained of with the knowledge of her former employers. However, solicitors concerned said in evidence that she had acted without their consent or knowledge.
Martin Kwaku Ofosuthene, solicitor, (formerly a solicitor's clerk), 64, admitted 1991, and at material time a barrister employed by Stuart A West & Co, London EC1, fined £5,000 and ordered to pay costs. Allegations substantiated that he had been involved in acting for the purchaser in a property transaction in breach of the terms of an injunction in relation to the vendor for whom he also acted in matrimonial and wardship proceedings. He was also found to have failed to act towards another firm of solicitors with complete frankness and good faith. Tribunal considered there was no evidence he had attempted to mislead the court or the land registry. Nevertheless tribunal considered the financial penalty imposed should leave him in no doubt as to the unsatisfactory nature of his behaviour.