Former Burges Salmon employee sanctioned after criminal conviction for assault occasioning ABH
The Solicitors Regulation Authority has issued a written rebuke to a former employee of Burges Salmon LLP following a criminal conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
Gareth Parfitt, who was employed by Burges Salmon LLP at the time of the incident, entered into a regulatory settlement agreement with the Solicitors Regulation Authority. The agreement was dated 15 January 2026 and published on 20 January 2026.
Under the terms of the settlement, Mr Parfitt has been rebuked, agreed to the publication of the outcome, and will pay investigation costs of £300. The SRA confirmed that the outcome was reached by agreement and concluded its investigation into his conduct.
The regulatory action follows Mr Parfitt’s conviction at Cardiff Magistrates’ Court on 7 June 2024. He pleaded guilty to assault occasioning actual bodily harm, contrary to section 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
The offence occurred in the early hours of 1 January 2024, when Mr Parfitt was involved in an altercation with a door supervisor at a nightclub. He was sentenced on 9 August 2024. The court ordered him to pay compensation of £1,500 to the victim, payable in monthly instalments of £200 starting on 30 August 2024. He was also fined £500 and ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £200.
In the regulatory settlement agreement, Mr Parfitt admitted that his conduct and subsequent conviction amounted to a failure to behave in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the solicitors’ profession. The SRA accepted this admission and found that his actions breached Principle 2 of the SRA Principles.
In determining the appropriate sanction, the SRA applied its Enforcement Strategy and considered a range of mitigating factors put forward by Mr Parfitt. These included his guilty plea, expressions of remorse, insight into his behaviour, and the assessment that the risk of reoffending is low. The SRA also noted that this was his first offence and was described as out of character, and that evidence had been provided showing he was experiencing personal difficulties in the 12 months prior to the incident.
The regulator concluded that a written rebuke was proportionate and necessary. It stated that the conduct was serious and required a public sanction to maintain professional standards and acknowledge the regulatory breach. At the same time, it took into account Mr Parfitt’s lack of any previous regulatory history.
The SRA confirmed that publication of the agreement is in the interests of transparency. Mr Parfitt has agreed not to deny the admissions made or act inconsistently with the settlement, failing which the matter could be reconsidered and potentially referred to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.