Tribunal rules dishonesty in loan dealings crossed into professional misconduct.
A solicitor has been struck off the roll after the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found he acted dishonestly when providing false information to obtain a corporate loan and later failed to pay counsel fees. The tribunal held that the conduct, although committed while he was not in practice, amounted to professional misconduct.
The SDT ruled that the behaviour of Stuart Nuttall, who qualified in 1997, “moved beyond personal opprobrium and into professional misconduct”. It found he acted dishonestly in his role as a company director, damaged public trust and later gave a false assurance about paying counsel’s invoice.
The tribunal heard that Mr Nuttall obtained a corporate loan for Sentium Group, a private security company that has since dissolved, in November 2018. When arranging the loan, he used a false company email address in the name of a co-director. He also impersonated the co-director on the telephone so that the co-director was named as a personal guarantor. The tribunal found he electronically signed the guarantor form using his colleague’s signature without permission.
Embed from Getty Images
The co-director only learned about the loan when he was notified of a default in January 2019. Shortly afterwards, Mr Nuttall wrote to the loan company acknowledging that he had wrongly taken out the loan. He stated that he had told the co-director he would indemnify him against any costs arising. The co-director later made a complaint to the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
In considering whether the conduct fell within the scope of professional regulation, the SDT reviewed High Court authority, including guidance in Beckwith. It determined that Mr Nuttall’s actions crossed the threshold for professional misconduct, even though they occurred outside legal practice and during a period in which he did not hold a practising certificate.
The tribunal said Mr Nuttall had been dishonest, had failed to act with integrity and had undermined public trust in the profession.
A second allegation concerned unpaid counsel fees. In 2021, Mr Nuttall instructed counsel to provide advice in conference and received an invoice for £1,440. He failed to pay. After being warned that the matter might be reported to the SRA, he wrote to chambers stating that he had authorised payment and asked for confirmation of receipt. The tribunal found that no payment had been made and concluded that the representation was false.
The SDT held that this conduct was also dishonest and showed a lack of integrity. It found he had made a knowingly false statement to chambers and had taken no steps to resolve the outstanding invoice.
The tribunal also found that Mr Nuttall failed to co-operate with the SRA’s investigation for over a year. He did not respond to a statutory production notice issued under section 44B(1) of the Solicitors Act 1974. He told the regulator he had been too unwell to provide information but did not supply any medical evidence in support of that claim.
Mr Nuttall did not engage with the disciplinary proceedings. The tribunal proceeded in his absence and concluded that his conduct was “clearly dishonest”. It found that there were no exceptional circumstances that would justify a penalty other than striking off.
The SDT therefore ordered that Mr Nuttall be struck off the roll of solicitors. He was also ordered to pay costs of £7,603.