Solicitor fined £10k by SRA over misleading sole practitioner claim

A solicitor has been fined £10,000 by the Solicitors Regulation Authority for misleading a county court by stating she could act as a sole practitioner.

Sundeep Kang, admitted in 2015, was practising at City firm Squire Patton Boggs and was not authorised by the SRA to act as a recognised sole or freelance practitioner.

According to the regulator, Kang assisted Person A, who was not a client of the firm, in civil proceedings at Coventry County Court. Kang also consented for her details to be included within the application.

The SRA said Kang ‘specifically requested’ that Person A referred to her as a sole practitioner when completing the application form. Person A later clarified the position after Kang asked him to write to the court saying that Kang was acting in a personal capacity and that her employer was not involved. Person A later instructed counsel for the remainder of the proceedings and Kang had no further involvement.

She admitted she had made a misleading statement to the court. 

Kang also admitted making a misleading statement to Coventry Family Court by stating she had been appointed to act as a solicitor for Person A when she could practice only as an employee of a recognised body.

The SRA said Kang’s actions were ‘serious’, describing her conduct as ‘reckless and demonstrated a disregard of her regulatory obligations’.

The regulator acknowledged Kang was not acting for personal or financial gain and her conduct ‘was motivated from compassion for Person A’ and she was not aware that her details were included within the statement of truth.

Kang fully engaged with the SRA’s investigation and though a ‘limited level’ of disruption was caused to county court proceedings, the other party was not fundamentally prejudiced, and no harm was caused to the firm or its client.

Fining Kang £10,000, the regulator said: ‘By entering into this agreement, the SRA confirms that the decision to refer Ms Kang’s conduct to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal dated 30 June 2023 is overturned.’

Kang must also pay £4,213.80 costs to the SRA.