Tribunal slams solicitor Hutchings with £30,000 fine over sexually motivated acts

Solicitor Daniel Hutchings was fined £30k and £18k costs after sexual harassment was proved

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has fined solicitor Daniel Paul Hugh Hutchings £30,000 after finding he sexually harassed a fellow solicitor at a professional event in central London. He was also ordered to pay £18,000 in costs.

Hutchings, admitted to the Roll in 2010, attended the Society of Construction Lawyers lunch on 7 February 2020, followed by an evening event at a Dover Street club. There, he approached a female solicitor, referred to as Person A, who he had never met before, and made a series of offensive comments about her body. The tribunal heard he told her “you’re really fit, aren’t you?”, and made crude remarks about her breasts and bottom. Witnesses described him as drunk, unsteady, and fixated on her throughout the evening.

In addition to the lewd comments, Hutchings repeatedly touched Person A on or around her waist despite her clearly rejecting his advances. She moved his hand away several times, told him to stop, and made it clear his behaviour was inappropriate. Person A described feeling forced to leave the area with a colleague, Witness B, to escape further contact, only for Hutchings to follow them repeatedly. Witness B, a paralegal, corroborated her account and described Hutchings as “handsy” and intrusive, noting that Person A showed more patience than she would have in such circumstances.

The tribunal found that Hutchings ignored Person A’s attempts to end the contact and laughed off her protests. She ultimately had to move to another floor of the venue to avoid him. The incident prompted her to complain to the Society of Construction Lawyers, which in turn led to a report being made to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).

Hutchings admitted most of the factual allegations, including making inappropriate remarks and unwanted touching, but denied that his behaviour was sexually motivated. He also denied lacking integrity. The tribunal rejected those denials and found his actions were sexually motivated, carried out either in pursuit of gratification or in pursuit of a future sexual relationship. It ruled his behaviour amounted to breaches of Principles 2 and 5 of the SRA Principles 2019.

The panel concluded that Hutchings’ behaviour, though lasting only minutes, represented clear sexual harassment and a significant departure from professional standards. His decision to get intoxicated at a professional networking event was no excuse. It emphasised that solicitors are expected to act with integrity, especially in professional contexts where the public and fellow practitioners must feel safe from harassment.

In considering sanction, the tribunal noted the misconduct was deliberate and repeated, causing harm to Person A, who felt compelled to move away, and to the reputation of the profession. It stressed that members of the public should be able to attend professional events without being subjected to sexual harassment by a solicitor. The panel assessed the fine at £52,000 but reduced it to £30,000 after considering Hutchings’ financial circumstances.

Mitigation was advanced, including Hutchings’ early admissions, character references, and a medical report stating there was no risk of repeat behaviour. The tribunal accepted he had suffered serious career consequences, including losing his job and prospects of promotion. However, it held that those factors could not outweigh the need for a penalty that reflected the seriousness of the misconduct.

Ultimately, the SDT concluded a fine, rather than suspension, was appropriate, citing the short duration of the incident, lack of predatory conduct, and the absence of a power imbalance. Nonetheless, the ruling makes clear that Hutchings’ actions left a stain on his professional reputation and serve as a stark warning that sexual harassment will not be tolerated within the legal profession.