The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) told a disciplinary tribunal on Monday that a law firm director dishonestly concealed his firm's acquisition of another company's work and staff after his insurer declined to offer coverage for the changes.

The SRA accused Anis Yusuf Dadu, director of XYZ Law Ltd., of providing false information to his professional indemnity insurer regarding the firm's acquisition of files from another company. According to the regulator, Dadu failed to disclose a significant change in the firm's operations despite having signed a succession agreement to take on new matters.

Allegations of Dishonesty

Representing the SRA, Matthew Edwards of Capsticks LLP, said Dadu knew the declaration he made to the insurer—that the nature of his firm's work had not significantly changed—was false. "Ordinary or decent people would regard such conduct as dishonest," Edwards told the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.

Dadu is facing possible removal from the roll of solicitors due to the SRA's allegations concerning his professional indemnity insurance arrangements in 2020 and 2021.

Acquisition Without Insurance

The dispute centers on XYZ Law’s acquisition of files and staff from Notary Express Ltd. in December 2020. The SRA claims that XYZ Law attempted to update its insurance to cover the new work but was declined by the insurer. Despite this, Dadu proceeded with the acquisition by signing two succession agreements.

In 2021, XYZ Law's insurer discovered the acquisition and questioned Dadu regarding the changes to his firm's operations. The insurer's inquiry also prompted the SRA to launch an investigation into Dadu's conduct.

Misleading Statements on Insurance Forms

The SRA alleges that when Dadu completed a new insurance proposal form, he falsely stated that his firm's operations had not significantly changed and that XYZ Law was not under investigation. Edwards argued that Dadu was aware these statements were untrue due to the firm's acquisition of Notary Express and the SRA's ongoing probe.

"The respondent, in completing and submitting the form that contained untrue and misleading information, meant that he misled them or attempted to mislead them," Edwards said during the hearing.

Defense Denies Dishonesty

Dadu, represented by Susanna Heley of Weightmans LLP, denied being dishonest or attempting to mislead the insurer. He maintained that the information provided on the insurance forms was accurate to the best of his knowledge at the time. However, Dadu admitted that he failed to inform his insurer of a material change in his practice.

The case, Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd. v. Anis Yusuf Dadu, continues in the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal under case number 12575/2024.