Ciaran Leeman
Employee
695287

Decision - Employee-related decision

Outcome: Control of non-qualified staff (Section 43 / Section 99 order)

Outcome date: 20 May 2022

Published date: 31 May 2022

Firm details

Firm or organisation at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: BHW Commercial Solicitors

Address(es): 5 Grove Court, Grove Park, Enderby, Leicester, LE19 1SA

Firm ID: 383490

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details

FINDING

Mr Leeman, who is not a solicitor, is or was involved in a legal practice and has occasioned or been a party to an act or default which involved such conduct on his part that it is undesirable for him to be involved in a legal practice in any of the ways described in the order below.

ORDER

To make an order pursuant to section 43 that with effect from the date of the letter notifying Mr Leeman of this decision:

1. no solicitor shall employ or remunerate him in connection with his/her practice as a solicitor;
2. no employee of a solicitor shall employ or remunerate him in connection with the solicitor’s practice;
3. no recognised body shall employ or remunerate him;
4. no manager or employee of a recognised body shall employ or remunerate him in connection with the business of that body;
5. no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit him to be a manager of the body; and
6. no recognised body or manager or employee of such body shall permit him to have an interest in the body

except in accordance with the SRA’s prior written permission.

Reasons/basis

THE FACTS

Between 25 July 2016 and 12 August 2020, Mr Leeman worked at BHW Solicitors whose head office is at 5 Grove Court, Grove Park, Enderby, Leicester, LE19 1SA, England. He was initially employed as a paralegal and then in August 2018, took on a non-fee earning role with the title “Office and Risk Supervisor”. The firm dismissed him for gross misconduct on 12 August 2020.

It was found that on 1 July 2020, Mr Leeman fabricated 26 staff induction forms and misled his supervisor regarding their creation date.

It was found Mr Leeman’s conduct was dishonest.

Mr Leeman was ordered to pay the SRA costs of £300 in investigating this matter.