Osaro Idemudia
Employee
7015712

Decision - Employee-related decision

Outcome: Control of non-qualified staff (Section 43 / Section 99 order)

Outcome date: 11 August 2025

Published date: 27 August 2025

Firm details

Firm or organisation at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: Fragomen LLP

Address(es): 1st Floor 95 Gresham Street London EC2V 7NA

Firm ID: 459836

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details

Who does this decision relate to?

Osaro Idemudia whose last known address was in London. A person who is or was involved in a legal practice but is not a solicitor.

Summary of decision

The SRA has put restrictions on where and how Mr Idemudia can work in an SRA regulated firm. It was found that: Mr Idemudia, who is not a solicitor, was involved in a legal practice and has occasioned or been a party to an act or default which involved such conduct on his part that it is undesirable for him to be involved in a legal practice in any of the ways described in the order below.

Reasons/basis

The facts of the case

Mr Idemudia was employed as a senior immigration consultant at Fragomen LLP between 8 August 2017 and 11 August 2023 when he was dismissed by the firm.

On 11 July 2023, Mr Idemudia directed a colleague, who was under his supervision, to add the digital signature of a client's husband to a form required for an application for an immigration visa, without the express consent of the individual involved. He subsequently directed the same colleague to upload the ‘signed' spousal declaration form to the UK Visa and Citizenship Application Services (UKVCAS) portal.

Mr Idemudia's actions were found to be dishonest.

Decision on outcome

An order pursuant to section 43(2) of the Solicitors Act 1974 was imposed as Mr Idemudia's conduct meant that it was undesirable for him to be involved in a legal practice without the SRA's prior approval. The order pursuant to section 43 was made with effect from the date of the letter or email notifying Mr Idemudia of this decision

Mr Idemudia's conduct was serious. Although he was motivated in part by the desire to assist his client, Mr Idemudia's actions meant that a document containing a false signature was submitted to UKVCAS in support of a client's application for a visa. This could have had serious implications for the client and was dishonest.

Mr Idemudia was also ordered to pay a proportion of the SRA's costs of £600.

What our Section 43 order means

1. no solicitor shall employ or remunerate him in connection with his/her practice as a solicitor;
2. no employee of a solicitor shall employ or remunerate him in connection with the solicitor's practice;
3. no recognised body shall employ or remunerate him;
4. no manager or employee of a recognised body shall employ or remunerate him in connection with the business of that body;
5. no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit him to be a manager of the body; and
6. no recognised body or manager or employee of such a body shall permit him to have an interest in the body

except in accordance with the SRA's prior written permission.