News Releases
Court dismisses appeal by miners’ compensation lawyers
3 December 2009
Two solicitors who were struck off by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal for misconduct in the handling of former miners' health compensation claims lost their appeals at the High Court today.
James Rhodes Beresford and Douglas Harold Smith, of Beresfords Solicitors LLP of Doncaster, which handled almost 100,000 claims, were struck off and ordered to pay all costs on 11 December 2008.
The appeals failed on all grounds. Commenting on today's judgment, Solicitors Regulation Authority Chief Executive, Antony Townsend said: "The SRA has vigorously pursued the solicitors who betrayed the trust placed in them by their clients in this case and other miners' compensation cases.
"This has sent a clear message to firms and, with the work of the Legal Complaints Service, has contributed to millions of pounds being paid back to miners by solicitors–where possible voluntarily or by agreement. This is a good result for consumers, and should serve as a reminder to solicitors of the importance of acting with integrity in the best interests of each client, and of promptly putting things right for clients where errors are discovered."
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal hearing on 11 December 2008 considered numerous allegations against Beresford and Smith, including that they had acted where there were serious conflicts of interests; they had entered into conditional fee and contingency fee agreements when it was not in their clients' best interests to do so; they had breached the Solicitors' Introduction and Referral Code 1990; they had entered into sham arrangements with third parties; and that they had breached client confidentiality.
The Tribunal concluded that the evidence given by Mr Beresford and Mr Smith was "not always believable" and rejected their claim that because the former miners had entered into an agreement with a claims handler before they instructed them, they were not concerned with it. It found Beresford and Smith to have been dishonest in respect of the sham arrangements, which were intended to disguise breaches of the Solicitors Practice Rules.
The Tribunal found, "There was no real evidence that the Respondents or their staff properly discharged all their duties to the miners."
"Mr Beresford had described himself as an entrepreneur. Unfortunately it was the Tribunal's view that his commercial attitude had allowed both Mr Beresford and Mr Smith to put commercial goals before their clients' best interests."