Date
22 April 2021
Charges
Five charges of misconduct against Michael Olaseinde were referred to the Disciplinary Tribunal as follows:
Charges 1-3
Failing to behave with integrity, contrary to Principle 3, Outcome 3.2 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015.
Failing to maintain high standards of professional and personal conduct and justify public trust in himself, his profession, and the provision of legal services by engaging in conduct that could undermine or affect adversely the confidence and trust placed in him and his profession by his client, employer, professional colleagues, the public and others, contrary to Principle 2, Outcome 2.2 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015.
Failing to comply with his legal and regulatory obligations and deal with regulators and ombudsmen openly, promptly and co-operatively, contrary to Principle 4, outcomes 4.1 and 4.2 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015.
The particulars are that between 15 November 2015 and 27 February 2016, as part of his application for graduate membership of CILEx, Michael Olaseinde misled or attempted to mislead CILEx Regulation, namely by failing to disclose, in writing, to CILEx Regulation full details of his prior conduct. Mr Olaseinde had completed the prior conduct questionnaire online in which he disclosed that he (i) had been struck off the Roll of Solicitors but not for dishonesty (ii) had been sued in the High Court and a default judgment was entered against him and (iii) was made bankrupt in 2009.He verbally informed the Professional Conduct Panel (PCP) on 26 February 2016 that the SRA had refused permission for him to be employed by SJ Solicitors but this had been refused because he needed to undertake further training. He failed to inform the PCP that this was in fact the second time that the SRA had refused permission for him to be employed in a firm of solicitors.
Charges 4-5
Failing to behave with integrity, contrary to Principle 3, Outcome 3.2 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015.
Failing to maintain high standards of professional and personal conduct and justify public trust in himself, his profession, and the provision of legal services. He engaged in conduct that could undermine or affect adversely the confidence and trust placed in him and his profession by his client, employer, professional colleagues, the public and others, contrary to Principle 2, Outcome 2.2 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015.
The particulars are that in 2016, following his admission as a Graduate member of CILEx, Michael Olaseinde allowed himself to be employed and/or remunerated by a firm of solicitors, knowing that permission to be employed and/or remunerated by them had been refused by the SRA in 2014. He knew or ought to have known that because he had been struck off the Roll of Solicitors since 2008, no firm of solicitors was permitted to employ and/or remunerate him without a written permission granted by the SRA.
Outcome
The Disciplinary Tribunal found five charges proved on a balance of probabilities.
Sanction – Exclusion – Fixed period
In accordance with Rule 30(5)(iv) of the CILEx Regulation Enforcement Rules, the Tribunal ordered an immediate exclusion from membership of CILEx with a direction that no application for readmission shall be entertained for a minimum of five years from the date of the Tribunal’s decision.
