The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has allowed a solicitor, indefinitely suspended in 2012, to re-join the profession, citing a stable personal and financial situation as critical factors in their decision. This development follows the tribunal’s hearing where Andrew Reeves explained the challenges he faced during the time of his misconduct.
In 2012, Andrew Reeves was suspended from practising law following his failure to maintain and produce necessary financial accounts after his firm, JW Reeves & Co, ceased operations in 2009. The suspension was a result of multiple breaches, including not submitting the last four accountants’ reports, improper management of client funds, and non-compliance with the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). Reeves admitted these allegations and cited his circumstances, including his young son’s severe illness and other personal crises.
At the time, Reeves was fined £750 and incurred additional costs of £3,500, with the stipulation that missing documents had to be submitted by January 2012 to avoid suspension. His inability to comply led to the indefinite suspension. Since then, he has worked in a bank, handling recovery operations, and occasionally assisted former clients in court as a McKenzie Friend with judicial permission.
During the recent tribunal, arguments were presented in favour of Reeves’ reinstatement. His counsel asserted that he posed no risk to the public and that ending his suspension would not damage the profession’s reputation. They highlighted that the personal issues which contributed to his past misconduct were resolved, showcasing his current financial stability and the absence of intentions to practise as a sole practitioner again.
Opposition from the SRA pointed to the lack of clarity regarding Reeves’ plans for resuming practice and the absence of evidence showing updated legal knowledge or training. Despite these concerns, the tribunal ultimately decided that expecting him to fulfil previous reporting requirements was unrealistic.
Reeves’ return to the legal profession comes with restrictions: he cannot operate as a sole practitioner, or partner in a firm, nor can he hold client funds or be a signatory on client accounts. Additionally, he is required to complete 16 hours of continuing professional development, including specific legal updates, within six months, subject to SRA approval. He was also ordered to pay £2,260 in costs.
The SDT’s decision reflects a delicate balancing of past errors against current rehabilitation, allowing Reeves a conditional return to practice while ensuring public trust is maintained.
