LONDON — A British tribunal has imposed a significant penalty on a lawyer who acted for former Chancellor Nadhim Zahawi amidst an investigation into Zahawi’s tax dealings. Lawyer Ashley Hurst, associated with Osborne Clarke, must pay £310,000 following complaints from a campaigner alleging efforts to suppress discussion about the controversy.
Hurst faced accusations of attempting to stifle Dan Neidle, a campaigner and founder of Tax Policy Associates, by leveraging a threatening tone in a communication issued in July 2022. Within this email, Hurst offered Neidle a chance to retract a potentially defamatory statement against Zahawi, coupling it with a veiled threat of legal action and restricting Neidle’s rights to disclose the contents of the email.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found Hurst guilty of violating the Solicitors Regulation Authority’s code of conduct regarding this email, fining him £50,000 and saddling him with an additional £260,000 in costs. However, a second claim related to another letter by Hurst sent in the same month was dismissed by the tribunal.
Dan Neidle took his grievances to the social platform X, critiquing the imposition on his freedom to speak out about the received legal threats. According to him, such tactics to enforce silence on legal threats are both “dangerous and absurd.” He expressed satisfaction with the tribunal’s decision, which supported his perspective.
The backdrop to these legal skirmishes included Zahawi’s embroiled controversy in July 2022, following his brief appointment as the Chancellor by then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Zahawi was scrutinized for allegedly avoiding taxes through an offshore company connected to his stakes in YouGov, the polling company he co-founded.
The situation escalated when, in January 2023, it was disclosed that Zahawi had agreed to a seven-figure settlement over his tax disputes, including penalties. This revelation coincided with his dismissal from the role of Conservative Party Chair by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, attributed mainly to his failure to disclose an ongoing HMRC investigation into these matters.
During the tribunal, Neidle recounted how he perceived Hurst’s email as a direct order to retract his claims without the option of sharing the incident publicly, under threat of serious consequences. He deemed the confidentiality labels on the email as a deliberate attempt to silence his criticisms of Zahawi.
Neidle ultimately published the contentious email and letter, despite warnings, bringing heightened attention to Zahawi’s tax issues. Hurst, for his part, defended his actions during the tribunal, stating the communications were neither aggressive nor intended to intimidate, and maintained his adherence to regulatory standards.
Osborne Clarke, the law firm involved, expressed both surprise and disappointment at the tribunal’s decision, citing inconsistencies with legal positions and gathered evidence. The firm stated its intentions to closely review the tribunal’s detailed explanations before making further comments.
This article was automatically generated by Open AI and may contain inaccuracies about people, facts, circumstances, and narratives. For corrections, retractions, or removal requests, please contact [email protected].