A solicitor of more than 30 years has agreed to be struck off after admitting he twice failed to tell the truth to leaders of his firm.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal heard that Simon Gurr had been called into a meeting with the compliance officers and managers at Kent firm Direction Home LLP in October 2019, when he was asked whether he had notified insurers about a recent court setback.
Gurr confirmed he had indeed reported the matter to the firm’s insurers at least two months previously and was asked to produce the email.
In a further meeting with senior figures at the firm four days later, he said the email could not be located, but he had been able to copy the text and produce that. He was asked how he could copy text from an email that could not be located and had no answer.
The insurer confirmed there had been no email sent until after Gurr’s first meeting with the firm’s leaders. He subsequently admitted his first responses had been false and left the firm soon after.
Gurr agreed an outcome with the SRA that he would be struck off. He has since retired and is living in South Africa.
In non-agreed mitigation, Gurr said he had enjoyed an unblemished 32-year career as a solicitor and never faced disciplinary action before. During the meeting where he misled the firm, he was in a ‘state of shock’ and panicked when being unexpectedly confronted by his fellow partners.
Gurr had been reported to the SRA by the firm raising concerns about him backdating letters, misleading the Senior Costs Courts and the firm about these letters, then going on to rely on the letters in a witness statement. It was reported by the firm that he then failed to report these issues and was misleading when asked about them.
The underlying matter was a settled personal injury claim where the costs were due to be assessed. Gurr’s firm was ordered to repay £250,000 to the defendant after failing to comply with an unless order, despite making an application for relief from sanction.
The SRA’s case had originally included allegations that Gurr made misleading statements to the court in the course of those proceedings. He did not admit these allegations and argued that the SRA’s expert evidence in support of them was inconclusive.
The SRA told the tribunal the allegations were properly brought and arguable, but in light of the other admissions, they would not be pursued.
The tribunal supported the agreed outcome that Gurr be struck off. He was also ordered to pay £15,000 costs.
