Barrister convicted of CS gas offences disbarred after second disciplinary hearing

Print This Post

3 December 2014


Barrister was convicted of obstructing the police

A barrister who successfully appealed the decision of a previous disciplinary tribunal was yesterday ordered by a new tribunal panel to be disbarred.

Giles Norton of Sheffield was ordered to be disbarred in February 2014 after a bar tribunal found he had failed to disclose two previous criminal convictions for possessing unlawful CS spray and one of obstructing a police officer.

Mr Norton – who was called in 2004 and was a sole practitioner based at Enigma Chambers – was also found to have falsely claimed on his CV that he had first class honours degrees from Harvard University in Chinese and information technology, and that he had an LLM from Staffordshire University in international trade and export.

He was originally disbarred in February, but successfully appealed the ruling in August, when the High Court decided that the tribunal had misdirected itself when it decided not to grant an adjournment and instead proceeded with the hearing in his absence.

The appeal court ordered a new hearing, which took place on 1 December 2014 and which also concluded that an order of disbarment was appropriate.

It also took into account his lack of co-operation with the Bar Standards Board’s investigation, which the tribunal said amounted to professional misconduct in the circumstances.

Speaking after the original tribunal, the BSB’s head of professional conduct, Sara Down, said: “Our duty as a regulator is, first and foremost, to protect the public. Mr Norton not only failed to disclose serious criminal convictions, but also fabricated his qualifications. In our view, there is no place at the Bar for such dishonesty and we believe the tribunal decision is the right one.”

Tags: ,



Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

Rating lawyers by their wins and losses – a good idea?

Robert Ambrogi

Lawyers will give you any number of reasons why their win-loss rates in court are not accurate reflections of their legal skills. Yet a growing number of companies are evaluating lawyers by this standard – compiling and analysing lawyers’ litigation track records to help consumers and businesses make more-informed hiring decisions. The shortcomings of evaluating lawyers by win rates are many. Not least of them is that so few cases ever make it to a win or loss. Of equal concern is that, in the nuances of law practice, it is not always obvious what constitutes a win or a loss.

February 22nd, 2017