Cyprian Akpelishi Amgbah fails to provide sufficient evidence of rehabilitation after 16 years
A solicitor who was struck off 16 years ago for multiple breaches of the accounts rules has failed in his attempt to return to the roll. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) found that Cyprian Akpelishi Amgbah, who had been removed from the roll in 2009, did not provide enough evidence of his rehabilitation despite his recent legal work.
Mr Amgbah, who qualified in 2002, was the sole equity partner of a firm when he was struck off for 13 breaches of accounts rules, including withdrawing money beyond what he held for clients, providing banking facilities, and making round-sum transfers between client and office accounts to ease the firm’s cash flow. He was also found to have made secret profits. Six of the allegations were deemed dishonest. The High Court dismissed his appeal against the strike-off in 2010.
Since 2020, Mr Amgbah has been working as an immigration caseworker at the London law firm David Wyld & Co, under restrictions set by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). In 2023, his role expanded to include family law, probate, and general litigation.
Embed from Getty Images
During his hearing, Mr Amgbah acknowledged the seriousness of his original misconduct and expressed regret, describing the experience of being struck off as “humbling” and stating that he had damaged the reputation of the profession. He attributed his earlier failures to inexperience and inadequate oversight rather than malicious intent. He also emphasised that he had gained a better understanding of legal and regulatory frameworks since his removal from the roll.
Mr Amgbah argued that being restored to the roll would enhance his ability to represent clients effectively and allow him to subject himself to the high standards expected of solicitors. He stated that he had no intention of becoming a partner and was content to continue working under the current restrictions.
However, the SRA opposed his application, citing the severity of his original misconduct and the lack of sufficient evidence to support his claim of rehabilitation. While his supervisor at David Wyld & Co, Grace Osewele, spoke positively about his work, the SDT noted that her professional interactions with him had been limited and the volume of cases she supervised was low. Furthermore, the tribunal found that although Mr Amgbah had undergone training as part of his rehabilitation, this was done in a “flurry” before his application and did not demonstrate sustained commitment to maintaining his legal knowledge.
The tribunal ruled that while Mr Amgbah had taken positive steps toward rehabilitation, the absence of supporting documentary evidence weakened his case. Given the seriousness of the misconduct, the tribunal concluded that the high threshold for restoration to the roll had not been met.
Mr Amgbah was also ordered to pay £4,700 in costs.