SDT finds solicitor practised without approval and put client funds at risk.
A solicitor has been suspended for nine months after practising as a sole practitioner without authorisation for more than three years.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) ordered the suspension of Michelle Niaz, who was admitted to the roll in December 2015, after finding that she operated without the required regulatory approval between January 2020 and September 2023.
Niaz admitted all allegations brought against her. However, she denied that her conduct had been reckless. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) was granted permission to withdraw an allegation of recklessness during proceedings.
Niaz became a partner at Clitheroe-based firm Lewis Mitchell Solicitors Inc Ruth Moores in 2016. In January 2020, another partner left the firm and was not replaced. As a result, Niaz became the sole partner of the practice.
She had previously taken on regulatory responsibilities within the firm. From December 2016, she served as compliance officer for legal practice (COLP). From January 2017, she also held the role of compliance officer for finance and administration (COFA).
According to the agreed outcome approved by the SDT, Niaz operated as a sole practitioner without authorisation from January 2020 until September 2023. During that period, she also held client money while not practising within an authorised body.
The tribunal described Niaz as “an experienced solicitor who was aware of her regulatory responsibilities”. It found that she had direct control and responsibility for the circumstances that led to the misconduct.
In its written judgment, the SDT stated that Niaz had the procedural knowledge required to replace a partner, noting that she had done so previously. The tribunal concluded that the regulatory breaches arose in circumstances where she held responsibility for ensuring compliance.
The suspension took effect from 22 January 2026 and will run for nine months.
In explaining its decision, the tribunal emphasised the risks created by the misconduct. It stated: “Clients were placed at risk as a result of the respondent practising without authorisation, holding client money when not entitled to do so, failing to carry out reconciliations and failing to ensure that accounts reports were prepared as required. The potential for harm was significant.”
The SDT did not make findings of dishonesty. It accepted the agreed outcome between the parties and approved the withdrawal of the allegation of recklessness.
Following the suspension, Niaz will be subject to conditions on her future practice. She may not practise as a sole practitioner, manager or owner of an authorised or regulated body for an indefinite period. She may not work as a solicitor unless approved by the SRA. In addition, she is prohibited from acting as a partner or member of a limited liability partnership (LLP), licensed body (LDP), alternative business structure (ABS) or any other regulated entity.
The tribunal also ordered Niaz to pay £22,140 in costs.
The case underscores the regulatory framework governing solicitors who practise as sole practitioners and the requirement to obtain appropriate authorisation before operating outside an approved body. The SDT’s findings focus on compliance failures and the management of client money, both of which fall within core regulatory obligations overseen by the SRA.
The judgment reflects the tribunal’s assessment that practising without authorisation and holding client funds outside an authorised structure exposed clients to risk, even in the absence of findings of recklessness or dishonesty.