Loading...

Kazi, Mohammed - 565400

Decisions

To view the decision against this individual, click the decision below.

Decision - employee-related decision

Outcome: Control of non-qualified staff (section 43 order)

Outcome date: 24 October 2011

Published date: 25 November 2011

Firm details

Firm or organisation at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: Wolstenholmes LLP; Norman Saville & Co Solicitors and MacIntyre Clarke LLP

Address(es):
Manchester (Wolstenholmes); Birmingham (Norman Saville) and London ( MacIntyre Clarke)

Firm ID: 443877 (Wolstenholmes); 535950 (Norman Saville) and 517894 (MacIntyre Clarke)

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details

1. The Adjudicator FOUND that Mohammed Kazi formerly of an address in the Birmingham area (current whereabouts unknown) who is or was involved in legal practice but is not a solicitor: has, in the Society’s opinion occasioned or been a party to, with or without the connivance of a solicitor, an act or default in relation to a legal practice which involved conduct on his part of such a nature that in the Society’s opinion it would be undesirable for him to be involved in a legal practice in one or more of the ways mentioned in sub-section (1A) of section 43 of the Solicitors Act 1974 (as amended).

2. The Adjudicator therefore DECIDED to make an Order under Section 43(2) of the Solicitors Act 1974 (as amended) that with effect from the date of the letter notifying Mohammed Kazi formerly of an address in the Birmingham area (current whereabouts unknown), of this decision, that

  • (i) no solicitor shall employ or remunerate him, in connection with his practice as a solicitor;
  • (ii) no employee of a solicitor shall employ or remunerate him in connection with the solicitor’s practice;
  • (iii) no recognised body shall employ or remunerate him;
  • (iv) no manager or employee of a recognised body shall employ or remunerate him in connection with the business of that body;
  • (v) no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit him to be a manager of the body;
  • (vi) no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit him to have an interest in the body

except in accordance with a Society permission.

3. There is no internal right of appeal against this Order.

4. There is a statutory right to apply to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal for a review of this Order.

5. The Adjudicator was satisfied in line with paragraph 4A of the SRA's publication policy that it is appropriate to DIRECT that this Order to be published in the Law Society Gazette, on the SRA website and by way of a press release.

Reasons/basis

The Adjudicator considered that in light of the evidence demonstrating Mr Kazi's involvement in several legal practices where serious defaults had occurred and which had resulted in substantial losses to clients, it is proportionate and in the public interest to take steps to publish this decision and the accompanying Order. The Adjudicator considered such a step is necessary in order to protect the public, profession and potential clients from the risk posed by allowing Mr Kazi to be employed and/or remunerated by a solicitor in connection with any legal practice, except in accordance with the Society's permission.

However, the Adjudicator was mindful that it cannot yet be established that Mr Mohammed Kazi has received the case papers in respect of Wolstenholmes LLP and MacIntyre Clarke LLP, although extensive efforts have been made to contact him, and letters have been sent to various addresses held for him. The Adjudicator therefore proposed to make the Order in the terms set out in this minute with a view to the Order being published immediately, with a date for the Order to take effect some 28 days following its publication. This affords Mr Kazi an opportunity to raise representations on the proposed Order before its implementation.

Should Mr Kazi contact the SRA and/or make submissions within 28 days of the abovementioned Order being published, the SRA will consider exercising its discretion to review the matter under the Reconsideration Policy.

Help and more information