Solicitor rebuked and fined after misleading client documents cited SRA authorisation
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has issued a formal rebuke to solicitor Annabelle Gauberti, following findings that client documents at her French law practice contained misleading information about her authorisation status and that she failed to fully co-operate with a regulatory investigation.
The SRA’s decision, dated 1 October 2025 and published on 3 November 2025, confirms that Ms Gauberti was rebuked in writing and ordered to pay investigation costs of £1,350. The sanction follows an SRA review of client communications used by Crefovi, the Paris-based firm she directs, which is not authorised by the SRA.
Ms Gauberti, who is listed on the Roll of Solicitors with SRA ID 446075, currently holds a practising certificate and is also registered as a freelance solicitor under SRA ID 828144. Despite this, her business, Crefovi, operates as a French law firm and is not authorised by the SRA to provide regulated legal services in England and Wales.
According to the published decision, the SRA received a complaint from a client who had instructed Crefovi to handle intellectual property infringement issues with retailers in France. The client’s initial concerns related primarily to the level of service provided, and the SRA referred those issues to the Legal Ombudsman. However, the client also expressed confusion about which legal entity had been acting on their behalf.
Embed from Getty ImagesIn response to the SRA’s enquiries, Ms Gauberti supplied two client care letters that she said demonstrated that the agreement was between the client and Crefovi. She maintained that it was “300 percent clear” to clients that the instruction was made to the firm, not to her as an individual solicitor.
However, the SRA found that the client care documents were misleading because they contained references to Ms Gauberti’s SRA authorisation status on Crefovi’s official letterhead, potentially giving clients the impression that the firm itself was regulated by the SRA. The regulator informed Ms Gauberti that she should not use her individual SRA registration details in documentation associated with an unauthorised firm.
The SRA requested that Ms Gauberti amend her client care materials to remove any such references and confirm that corrective steps had been taken. The decision record states that while discussions were held between Ms Gauberti and the SRA regarding the necessary changes, she did not confirm whether the amendments were made. The SRA warned that failure to co-operate could lead to further regulatory action.
Following her continued lack of confirmation, the regulator concluded that Ms Gauberti had failed to fully co-operate with the SRA’s investigation. As a result, a written rebuke was imposed, accompanied by the order for costs.
The SRA stated that the sanction reflected both the seriousness of misleading regulatory information and the obligation of solicitors to co-operate with the regulator. The rebuke serves as a formal record of misconduct but allows Ms Gauberti to continue practising under her existing authorisation as long as she complies with professional obligations.
The regulator’s published reasoning notes that the measures taken are designed to maintain transparency and public confidence in the legal profession. It emphasised that solicitors must not give clients inaccurate or ambiguous information about the regulatory status of their firms, particularly where this could affect a client’s understanding of whether protections such as professional indemnity insurance and access to the Legal Ombudsman apply.
The SRA said the rebuke was a proportionate response under its sanctioning powers, intended to underline the importance of honesty and cooperation during investigations. The regulator reiterated that it considers misleading information about authorisation status a significant matter, as it can undermine trust in the profession.
Ms Gauberti remains entitled to practise as a solicitor in England and Wales under her freelance authorisation but must comply with all ongoing conditions and ethical standards imposed by the SRA.