Date
19 March 2019
Charges
The seven charges of misconduct against Ehi Andrew Ukiwa referred to the Disciplinary Tribunal were that:
Charge 1
Ehi Andrew Ukiwa failed to maintain high standards of professional and personal conduct and justify public trust in himself, his profession and the provision of legal services:
Contrary to: Principle 2, Outcome 2.2 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015.
The particulars to this charge, and charge 2 below where that, Ehi Andrew Ukiwa, whilst a graduate member of CILEx, carried out a reserved legal activity when not entitled to do so under the Legal Services Act 2007 (as amended) by purporting to exercise of a right of audience and representing a party in proceedings before the County Court of Bromley on 5 September 2016 and again in the Chancery Division of the High Court at the Rolls Building on 11 October 2016, 6 December 2016 and 20 January 2017.
Charge 2
Ehi Andrew Ukiwa failed to understand and comply with his legal and regulatory obligations and/ or failed also to act competently in the best interests of his client in that he acted in a matter in which he was not authorised to act:
Contrary to: Principle 4, Outcomes 4.1 and 4.2 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015 and/or Principle 5, Outcome 5.6 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015.
Charge 3
Ehi Andrew Ukiwa failed to behave with honesty and integrity:
Contrary to: Principle 3, Outcomes 3.1, 3.2 and 3.5 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015.
The particulars to this charge were that, on 20 January 2017, Ehi Andrew Ukiwa, whilst a graduate member of CILEx and pupil barrister in the first period of his pupillage practiced as a barrister and purported to be authorised to carry out a reserved legal activity, namely the exercise of a right of audience, in proceedings before the Chancery Division of the High Court at the Rolls Building, in circumstances where he knew he was not entitled or authorised to do so, alternatively was reckless as to whether or not he was entitled or authorised to do so.
Charge 4
Ehi Andrew Ukiwa failed to uphold the rule of law and the impartial administration of justice:
Contrary to: Principle 1, Outcomes 1.1 and 1.2 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015.
The particulars to this charge were that, on or about 20 January 2017, Ehi Andrew Ukiwa, then a graduate member of CILEx, failed to observe his duty to the court in the administration of justice by appearing and purporting to exercise a right of audience and representing a party in proceedings before the Chancery Division of the High Court at the Rolls Building.
Charge 5
Ehi Andrew Ukiwa failed to maintain high standards of professional and personal conduct and justify public trust in himself, his profession and the provision of legal services and failed also to understand and/or comply with the law and regulation applicable to him:
Contrary to: Principle 2, Outcome 2.2 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015 and Principle 4, Outcomes 4.1 and 4.2 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015.
The particulars to this charge were that, on 28 June 2018 Ehi Andrew Ukiwa, then a graduate member of CILEx, was found guilty of six charges of professional misconduct by the Bar Disciplinary Tribunal, who imposed on him the sanction of suspension from practising as a barrister for a total of six months. The charges relate to Mr Ukiwa exercising rights of audience when he was not entitled to do so, on 5 September 2016 in the County Court at Bromley, and again in the Chancery Division of the High Court at the Rolls Building on 11 October 2016, 6 December 2016 and 20 January 2017.
Charge 6
Ehi Andrew Ukiwa failed to understand and comply with the regulation applicable to him and failed to deal with his regulator openly, promptly and co-operatively:
Contrary to: Principle 4, Outcomes 4.1 and 4.2 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015.
The particulars to this charge were that, between 16 August 2017 and 13 February 2019, Ehi Andrew Ukiwa failed to notify CILEx Regulation in writing of the investigation and proceedings concerning his fitness to practise by another regulatory body, namely the Bar Standards Board, thereby breaching also Rules 11(1)(g) and 12(2) of the CILEx Regulation Investigation, Disciplinary and Appeals Rules 2015 and Enforcement Rules 2018.
Charge 7
Ehi Andrew Ukiwa failed to understand and comply with the regulation applicable to him and deal with his regulator openly, promptly and co-operatively:
Contrary to: Principle 4, Outcomes 4.1 and 4.2 of the CILEx Code of Conduct 2015.
The particulars to this charge were that, on or after 11 September 2018, Mr Ehi Andrew Ukiwa failed to respond to communications from his regulator, namely CILEx Regulation, and requests from his regulator for information about his employment.
Outcome
The Disciplinary Tribunal found all seven charges against Mr Ukiwa proved on the balance of probabilities and also on the basis that the Bar Disciplinary Tribunal’s findings on which charges 1 to 5 were based amounted to conclusive evidence against Mr Ukiwa under Rule 29(6)(b) of the CILEx Regulation Enforcement Rules 2018.
Sanction – Indefinite exclusion
In accordance with Rule 30(5)(iv) of the CILEx Regulation Enforcement Rules 2018, the Disciplinary Tribunal ordered the immediate exclusion of Mr Ukiwa from CILEx membership for an indefinite period.
