Past disciplinary findings

Drew St’Clair, a barrister, behaved in a way which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in him or in the profession, in that, on or about 10 November 2021, Mr St’Clair abused his position by using relevant personal contact information he had been given whilst prosecuting a case on behalf of the CPS on 10 November 2021 at the Willesden Magistrates Court in order to pursue his romantic
interest in Person A, the defendant in those proceedings, whom he had met at court in his professional role as a prosecutor and whom he knew to be or was likely to be
vulnerable as a victim of domestic abuse.

Drew St’Clair, a barrister, behaved in a way which could reasonably be seen by the public to undermine his integrity, in that, on or about 10 November 2021, Mr St’Clair abused his position by using relevant personal contact information he had been given whilst prosecuting a case on behalf of the CPS on 10 November 2021 at the Willesden Magistrates Court in order to pursue his romantic interest in Person A, the defendant in
those proceedings, whom he had met at court in his professional role as a prosecutor and whom he knew to be or was likely to be vulnerable as a victim of domestic abuse.

Drew St’Clair, a barrister, behaved in a way which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in him or in the profession (CD5), in that, on or about 10 November 2021, Mr St’Clair abused his position by using the personal contact information he had been given whilst prosecuting a case on behalf of the CPS, on 10 November 2021 at the Willesden Magistrates Court, in order to pursue his romantic
interest in Person A whom he had met at court in his professional role as a prosecutor, and whom he knew to be or was likely to be vulnerable as a victim of domestic abuse. The efforts he made to contact Person A on 10 and 11 November 2021 involved unwanted conduct, amounting to harassment, that related to a protected characteristic (sex), with the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for Person A.

Drew St’Clair, a barrister, behaved in a way which could reasonably be seen by the public to undermine his integrity, in that, on or about 10 November 2021, Mr St’Clair abused his position by using the personal contact information he had been given whilst
prosecuting a case on behalf of the CPS, on 10 November 2021 at the Willesden Magistrates Court, in order to pursue his romantic interest in Person A whom he had met at court in his professional role as a prosecutor, and whom he knew to be or was likely to be vulnerable as a victim of domestic abuse. The efforts he made to contact Person A on 10 and 11 November 2021 involved unwanted conduct, amounting to harassment, that related to a protected characteristic (sex), with the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for Person A.

Drew St’Clair, a barrister, unlawfully discriminated and harassed a person on grounds of a protected characteristic, namely sex, in that, on or about 10 November 2021, Mr St’Clair abused his position by using the personal contact information he had been given whilst prosecuting a case on behalf of the CPS, on 10 November 2021 at the Willesden Magistrates Court, in order to pursue his romantic interest in Person A whom
he had met at court in his professional role as a prosecutor, and whom he knew to be or was likely to be vulnerable as a victim of domestic abuse. The efforts he made to contact Person A on 10 and 11 November 2021 involved unwanted conduct, amounting to harassment, that related to a protected characteristic (sex), with the
purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for Person A.

Drew St’Clair, a barrister, failed to act in the best interests of his client, in that, on 10 November 2021, Mr St’Clair applied for an adjournment of a hearing involving Person A at the Willesden Magistrates Court and, when the application to adjourn was refused by the magistrates, offered no evidence, when he did not have instructions to apply for an adjournment or to offer no evidence and he failed to take any or any sufficient steps to obtain instructions from his client, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), prior to taking those steps.

Drew St’Clair, a barrister, behaved in a way which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in him or in the profession, in that, on 10 November 2021, Mr St’Clair applied for an adjournment of a hearing involving Person A at the Willesden Magistrates Court and, when the application to adjourn was refused by the magistrates, offered no evidence, when he did not have instructions to apply for an
adjournment or to offer no evidence and he failed to take any or any sufficient steps to obtain instructions from his client, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), prior to taking those steps.