Central Criminal Courts image
This site is based on Disciplinary and Regulatory Proceedings, 8th Edition
Disciplinary and Regulatory Proceedings is the leading work on this important and dynamic area of law. For 20 years it has provided authoritative guidance to lawyers, tribunals, and other experts dealing with professional discipline and regulation.

Newton hearings

‘Procedurally, it is imperative that the Tribunal does not proceed to sanctioning before having decided upon and announced the basis of its findings on the substantive allegations. As a general principle fairness demands that disputed issues which can substantially affect sanctions be resolved and be resolved in a procedurally fair manner, and that parties then be able to address the sanctioning tribunal on the appropriate sanction. An analogy in criminal sentencing is the so-called Newton hearing (R v Newton (1982) 4 Cr App R(S) 388), designed to resolve disputed issues of fact where after a guilty plea all that remains is sentencing. The judge hears evidence and decides the matter to provide a basis for the defendant to make representations and advance mitigation before the court passes sentence. The same approach must be followed by the Tribunal, so that it announces its findings on any matters having a bearing on sanction and then provides ample opportunity for representations to be made on behalf of the solicitor about the sanction to be imposed. There is no need to foreshadow the specific sanction contemplated when it should be within the contemplation of the party given the breaches committed and their context.’
Per Cranston J in Levy v Solicitors Regulation Authority [2011] EWHC 740 (Admin). (A sanction of nine months' suspension was properly imposed in the light of the appellant's admitted breaches of the accounts rules.)

 

6th Edition » | Chapter 14