Tribunal upheld misconduct findings after solicitor obtained and shared private contact details
A family law solicitor with more than four decades of experience has been fined £17,500 after a disciplinary tribunal found that he improperly sought a litigant’s private contact details and later obtained and disclosed them through a private investigator.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal heard allegations brought by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) against Clive Graham Wood, a sole practitioner and family law specialist practising through CGW Law in Oswestry, Cheshire.
The case arose from Mr Wood’s conduct during family court proceedings in July 2022, when he acted for a client involved in a dispute concerning child arrangements. The opposing party, referred to in the judgment as Person M, was representing herself and had chosen not to disclose her personal contact details directly to Mr Wood or his client.
According to the tribunal, Mr Wood first requested Person M’s address and telephone number in July 2022. Person M responded that she had already supplied those details to the court and was not required to provide them directly to him. She also indicated that she preferred communication to take place through email and that the court should determine appropriate arrangements.
Despite those responses, the tribunal found that Mr Wood continued to request the information on several occasions. The tribunal concluded that he knew, or ought to have known, that Person M did not wish to provide the details, had no legal obligation to do so and that the information was not necessary to progress his client’s case.
The tribunal found that this conduct amounted to an attempt to take unfair advantage of Person M’s position as a litigant in person. It ruled that Mr Wood breached Principles 2 and 5 of the SRA Principles 2019 and paragraph 1.2 of the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors.
The tribunal also examined Mr Wood’s decision to instruct a private investigation firm to trace Person M’s contact details. The investigator provided what was believed to be her address and telephone number. Mr Wood subsequently passed those details to his client.
The tribunal found that obtaining the information in this way was unnecessary, that Person M would not have consented to the process and that family procedure rules entitled her to withhold those details unless a court ordered disclosure.
While the tribunal did not uphold one aspect of the allegation concerning whether the court had been prevented from determining disclosure, it found the remaining elements proved. The tribunal found that Mr Wood obtained the information through a private investigator rather than seeking disclosure through the court process.
In mitigation, Mr Wood expressed remorse, describing his actions as professional misjudgements. He also pointed to his previously unblemished disciplinary record spanning approximately 44 years.
After considering the seriousness of the misconduct, the tribunal determined that a financial penalty was appropriate. It ordered Mr Wood to pay a fine of £17,500 and costs of £15,000.
The judgment was issued following a hearing held on 7 and 8 May 2026 and was filed on 5 June 2026.