The firm which has successfully settled over 300 claims on behalf of Iraqi clients is under the spotlight at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.
Leigh Day cut a deal with prominent human rights lawyer Phil Shiner to bring cases against the British government on behalf of Iraqi detainees alleging abuse by soldiers in the aftermath of a 2004 battle, and to split the proceeds. Their claims resulted in the Al-Sweady public inquiry which cost £31 million before it transpired that the allegations were untrue. Shiner was struck off in February after being found guilty of 22 misconduct charges, which included peerless ambulance chasing behaviour such as paying a middleman £500 a pop to locate clients.
In the first week of Leigh Day's mammoth seven week hearing before the SDT, the firm, its senior partner Martyn Day, partner Sapna Malik and an unnamed third individual were accused of many of the misdemeanours that toppled Shiner. Timothy Dutton QC told the tribunal that Day went ahead with an explosive press conference in which he and Shiner recklessly endorsed some of the most serious allegations, including claims that the British army was responsible for one of the worst army massacres in decades. The allegations were later proved wholly false.
Dutton said Leigh Day did not consider any medical evidence from doctors, and that Shiner asked his wife what she thought of a photo of injuries. Dutton said the firm didn't conduct background checks on its dodgy Iraqi clients and ignored key client Khuder Al Sweady's reputation as a violent liar to "keep him sweet".
When an Iraqi document handed to Leigh Day revealed that the firm's client 'victims' were in fact members of a militia, it failed to disclose the original, handwritten translation of the document. Instead a Leigh Day associate, Anna Crowther, shredded the crucial evidence a day before officials were due to inspect the file. Dutton said that Leigh Day argued that 5 PQE Crowther made a mistake due to her inexperience, but, "the public expects you to discharge your duties fully, and one can’t say ‘I’m too junior to have appreciated the significance of what I’m doing".
All the respondents deny misconduct.
Tip Off ROF
Leigh Day cut a deal with prominent human rights lawyer Phil Shiner to bring cases against the British government on behalf of Iraqi detainees alleging abuse by soldiers in the aftermath of a 2004 battle, and to split the proceeds. Their claims resulted in the Al-Sweady public inquiry which cost £31 million before it transpired that the allegations were untrue. Shiner was struck off in February after being found guilty of 22 misconduct charges, which included peerless ambulance chasing behaviour such as paying a middleman £500 a pop to locate clients.
In the first week of Leigh Day's mammoth seven week hearing before the SDT, the firm, its senior partner Martyn Day, partner Sapna Malik and an unnamed third individual were accused of many of the misdemeanours that toppled Shiner. Timothy Dutton QC told the tribunal that Day went ahead with an explosive press conference in which he and Shiner recklessly endorsed some of the most serious allegations, including claims that the British army was responsible for one of the worst army massacres in decades. The allegations were later proved wholly false.
 |
"So you're a baker, lovely. Here's my card." |
Dutton said Leigh Day did not consider any medical evidence from doctors, and that Shiner asked his wife what she thought of a photo of injuries. Dutton said the firm didn't conduct background checks on its dodgy Iraqi clients and ignored key client Khuder Al Sweady's reputation as a violent liar to "keep him sweet".
When an Iraqi document handed to Leigh Day revealed that the firm's client 'victims' were in fact members of a militia, it failed to disclose the original, handwritten translation of the document. Instead a Leigh Day associate, Anna Crowther, shredded the crucial evidence a day before officials were due to inspect the file. Dutton said that Leigh Day argued that 5 PQE Crowther made a mistake due to her inexperience, but, "the public expects you to discharge your duties fully, and one can’t say ‘I’m too junior to have appreciated the significance of what I’m doing".
All the respondents deny misconduct.
Comments
72
80
69
70
72
66
85
67
88
77
Or just running for the hills?
80
75
83
77