Zapryanova v The Legal Services Regulatory Authority (Unapproved)

             On 7 th July 2022, the appellant filed a complaint (the "Complaint") with the respondent regarding professional services rendered by the notice party to the appellant through her solicitor, a Mr. Power.� It is necessary to say immediately that the appellant disputes that Mr. Power was retained by her at the time that the relevant advice was provided by the notice party, and so when I refer to him as "her solicitor", it is with that qualification, and I will explain how this state of affairs arose presently.

             Thereafter, the appellant continued to instruct Bernard Gaughran & Co. to act on her behalf for the purpose of issuing proceedings on her behalf, and Mr. Power continued to be responsible for dealing with the matter.� Mr. Power instructed the notice party, Mr. Wade, to advise and draft proceedings in the usual way.� None of this is controversial.

         ��The appellant then made separate complaints to the respondent, alleging that the solicitor and the barrister had provided inadequate services, and were guilty of misconduct.� It is appropriate to stress at this point that these proceedings are concerned only with the appellant's complaint made against the notice party, and the Determination.� The complaint against Mr. Power is a separate matter, and resulted in a separate decision of a divisional committee of the respondent, whereby that complaint was not upheld.

         The complaints made by the appellant against Mr. Wade may be summarised as follows:

(1)           That he failed to notify her of the dissolution of Bernard L. Gaughran & Co.;