Ex-DLA Piper partner working 70-hour week suspended for false signature

A former partner at global firm DLA Piper has agreed to be suspended for a year after inserting a witness’signature on a legal charge without their consent.

Robert Arnison said his misconduct was a ‘classic moment of madness’ and came in the midst of him being ‘overloaded’ while working 70-hour weeks in the firm’s Manchester office.

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal heard that Arnison, a solicitor of 24 years, had been instructed in relation to the purchase of a £13.5m property in Chelsea, London, partly funded by a £6m loan. When the lending bank’s solicitor said the witness to the legal charge had not signed the documents, Arnison responded within 20 minutes attaching a copy of the mortgage deed with what he described as the full names and witness signature.

The tribunal heard it was later apparent that the signature on this document and one on the extended lease did not match. Asked whether the documents were signed in the presence of the attesting witness, Arnison confirmed that they had been.

After the transaction was completed, he reported to his firm that he had applied the witness’s signature without their consent. He was suspended and subsequently ceased to be a partner, taking on the role of a consultant solicitor on a much-reduced salary.

Arnison reached an agreed outcome with the SRA to be suspended, and he advanced additional mitigation which was not endorsed by the regulator.

He submitted that he now understood he had worked ‘excessively hard’ as manager and supervisor of the real estate department of the Manchester office. He would typically work between 14 and 16 hours per day in the office four days a week, with 10 hours worked on the fifth day. He would also work most Sundays and while on holiday.

He made no criticism of the firm, but said he took too much upon himself and was ‘on the verge of burnout’. Suffering from anxiety and panic when the missing signature was brought up, he ‘applied a squiggle’ where it should have been and had not tried to make a replica.

The SRA accepted this was a one-off incident and acknowledged Arnison had health issues – the details of which were redacted from the SDT ruling – which affected his judgement.

The tribunal took note of the medical evidence, Arnison’s self-report, the unplanned nature of the misconduct, the lack of harm caused and the likelihood that he was ‘overloaded’ with work. He was ordered to pay £17,250 costs.