Edward Allen
Solicitor
505198

Decision - Sanction

Outcome: Rebuke

Outcome date: 23 June 2025

Published date: 24 June 2025

Firm details

No detail provided:

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details

1. Agreed outcome

1.1 Mr Edward Allen ('Mr Allen'), a solicitor, agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of his conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA):

1. He is rebuked
2. to the publication of this agreement
3. he will pay the costs of the investigation of £300.

2. Summary of Facts

2.1 On 28 February 2024, the SRA was informed that on 23 February 2024 Mr Allen had been arrested for failing to provide a specimen of breath for analysis, and on 24 February 2024 Mr Allen had been arrested for driving a motor vehicle when his alcohol level was above the limit.

2.2 On 26 February 2024, Mr Allen attended Hull Magistrates Court where he pleaded guilty to driving a motor vehicle when his alcohol level was above the limit. On 8 May 2024, Mr Allen attended Hull Magistrates Court where he pleaded guilty to failing to provide a specimen of breath for analysis.

2.3 Mr Allen was disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence for 36 months, received a fine of £120 for each conviction, a surcharge of £48 for each conviction and costs of £85.

3. Admissions

3.1 Mr Allen makes the following admissions which the SRA accepts:

1. by virtue of failing to provide a specimen of breath for analysis and driving a motor vehicle when his alcohol level was above the limit and his convictions for these offences, he has failed to behave in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the solicitors’ profession in breach of Principle 2 of the SRA Principles.

4. Why a written rebuke is an appropriate outcome

4.1 The SRA’s Enforcement Strategy sets out its approach to the use of its enforcement powers where there has been a failure to meet its standards or requirements.

4.2 When considering the appropriate sanctions and controls in this matter, the SRA has taken into account the admissions made by Mr Allen and the following mitigation which he has put forward:

1. he pleaded guilty to the offences
2. he has cooperated with the SRA investigation
3. he has expressed insight and remorse into his offending, such that the risk of reoffending appears low, and
4. we have seen medical evidence which demonstrates that there were mitigating circumstances at the time of his arrest.

4.3 The SRA considers that a written rebuke is the appropriate outcome because:

1. due to the commission of two criminal offences and a breach of Principle 2, a sanction is required to uphold public confidence in the delivery of legal services, and
2. a lesser sanction would not sufficiently address the nature of the criminal offences.

5. Publication

5.1 The SRA considers it appropriate that this agreement is published in the interests of transparency in the regulatory and disciplinary process. Mr Allen agrees to the publication of this agreement.

6. Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement

6.1 Mr Allen agrees that he will not deny the admissions made in this agreement or act in any way which is inconsistent with it.

6.2 If Mr Allen denies the admissions or acts in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement, the conduct which is subject to this agreement may be considered further by the SRA. That may result in a disciplinary outcome or a referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on the original facts and allegations.

6.3 Denying the admissions made or acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement may also constitute a separate breach of principles 2 and 5 of the Principles and paragraph 7.3 of the Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs and RFLs.

7. Costs

7.1 Mr Allen agrees to pay the costs of the SRA's investigation in the sum of £300. Such costs are due within 28 days of a statement of costs due being issued by the SRA.