A former partner with international firm Reed Smith has told a tribunal that his secretary was to blame for him charging clients for his daughter’s trip from Athens to London.
George Panagopoulos, managing partner of the Athens office until his resignation in 2020, had travelled with his daughter to England for four days in October 2019 and the cost of the flights and hotels had been charged to three client accounts.
Giving evidence on the second day of his hearing before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, the shipping specialist denied knowingly charging the costs of his daughter’s part of the trip, and further denied acting dishonestly by altering documents prior to a disciplinary meeting four months later with his firm.
The tribunal heard previously that Panagopoulos’s personal secretary had asked him what to do about the expenses for the trip and had been told by him to ‘put it through and we will see’.
The solicitor said today it was never his intention that a client account should be charged for the cost of his daughter’s flight and expenses.
‘It seemed totally obvious that a [child's] flight would not be charged on a [client] file – I didn’t think that needed explaining,’ he said.
Questioned why he had appeared to tell his secretary the expenses arrangement was ‘fine’, he responded: ‘She came to me at a not opportune moment and mumbled something in half-Greek and half-English about my daughter’s name being on the receipt.
‘I said she could proceed. I didn’t at any point say to charge my daughter’s flight to the files. I believe [the secretary] was mistaken and there was a misunderstanding… maybe in hindsight I could look back and say I could explain things more clearly as she was inexperienced and making a lot of mistakes.
‘[But] before someone charges a [child's] flight on a file they really should have had pretty clear instructions before doing something like that.’
The tribunal heard that the four-day trip, which coincided with both his and his daughter’s birthday, had been booked as a hybrid work and business trip, despite Panagopoulos’ diary showing no meetings had been arranged.
He denied telling a senior colleague that a work meeting was being ‘tagged on’ to the trip and said that he fully intended to meet contacts on the Sunday evening for dinner before going to their office on the Monday morning. In the event, that meeting did not take place.
Cameron Scott, for the SRA, said Panagopoulos had merely ‘hoped’ to arrange some business meetings as part of the trip so he could charge the cost to the firm and the client.
He replied: ‘The intention was there would be business meetings and this would be properly chargeable to clients.’
The hearing continues.
