Natalie Todd
Solicitor
346195

Decision - Agreement

Outcome: Regulatory settlement agreement

Outcome date: 23 June 2026

Published date: 29 June 2026

Firm details

Firm or organisation at date of publication and at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: Cooke, Young & Keidan LLP

Address(es): 16 St.Martin’s Le Grand, London, EC1A 4EN

Firm ID: 498407

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by agreement.

Decision details

1. Agreed outcome

1.1 Natalie Elizabeth Georgina Todd (Mrs Todd), a solicitor of Cooke, Young & Keidan LLP (the Firm), agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of her conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA):

1. she is rebuked
2. to the publication of this agreement
3. she will pay the costs of the investigation of £300.

2. Summary of Facts

2.1 On 26 April 2025. Mrs Todd was approached by Avon and Somerset Police whilst driving following concerns that had been raised by a member of the public. Mrs Todd provided a sample of breath at the roadside and was arrested on the suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol. At the Custody Unit, Mrs Todd was requested to provide two samples of breath for analysis, despite an attempt, she failed to do so within the required time limit.

2.2 Mrs Todd was charged with failing to provide a specimen for analysis, contrary to section 7(6) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and Schedule 2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.

2.3 On 5 June 2025, Mrs Todd appeared at Taunton Magistrates' Court and was convicted of the above offence following a guilty plea.

2.4 Mrs Todd received the following sentence:

1. Disqualification from driving for a period of 22 months to be reduced by 22 weeks following completion of a course.
2. A community service order with an unpaid work requirement of 80 hours to be completed within 12 months
3. To pay costs of £85 to Crown Prosecution Service and surcharge of £114.

3. Admissions

3.1 Mrs Todd makes the following admission which the SRA accepts:

2. that by failing to provide a specimen for analysis, for which she was convicted, she breached Principle 1 and Principle 2 of the SRA Principles, which say:

'You uphold the proper administration of justice.'

'You behave in a way which maintains the trust and confidence in the legal profession.'

4. Why a written rebuke is an appropriate outcome

4.1 The SRA's Enforcement Strategy sets out its approach to the use of its enforcement powers where there has been a failure to meet its standards or requirements.

4.2 When considering the appropriate sanctions and controls in this matter, the SRA has taken into account the admissions made by Mrs Todd and the following mitigation which she has put forward:

1. This is Mrs Todd's first offence and she pleaded guilty.
2. Mrs Todd has no previous regulatory history.
3. Mrs Todd promptly self reported the incident when she was charged and convicted.
4. Mrs Todd has reflected on her actions is regretful, such that the risk of reoffending appears low.

4.3 The SRA considers that a written rebuke is the appropriate outcome because:

1. The SRA's Enforcement Strategy outlines examples and factors which affect our view of seriousness. This explains that we will always investigate criminal convictions 'given the importance of rule-abiding behaviour and public confidence in those involved in the overall effectiveness of our criminal justice system'.
2. Additionally, our topic guide on criminal offences outside of practice confirms our approach to enforcement of criminal offences and states 'We consider that the requirement to behave in a way that maintains public trust is likely to be breached by the commission of a criminal offence, given the high degree of trust which is placed in solicitors and law firms by the public.'
3. Our topic guide to the application of Principle 1 includes examples of when a solicitor may fail to uphold the proper administration of justice. This includes failing to provide a specimen of breath when lawfully sought.
4. Some public sanction required to uphold public confidence in the delivery of legal services.
5. This was an isolated incident with low risk of repetition.

5. Publication

5.1 The SRA considers it appropriate that this agreement is published in the interests of transparency in the regulatory and disciplinary process. Mrs Todd agrees to the publication of this agreement.

6. Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement

6.1 Mrs Todd agrees that she will not deny the admissions made in this agreement or act in any way which is inconsistent with it.

6.2 If Mrs Todd denies the admissions or acts in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement, the conduct which is subject to this agreement may be considered further by the SRA. That may result in a disciplinary outcome or a referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on the original facts and allegations.

6.3 Denying the admissions made or acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement may also constitute a separate breach of principles 2 and 5 of the Principles and paragraph 7.3 of the Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs and RFLs.

7. Costs

7.1 Mrs Todd agrees to pay the costs of the SRA's investigation in the sum of £300. Such costs are due within 28 days of a statement of costs due being issued by the SRA.