Past disciplinary findings

Andrew Begg, an unregistered barrister, engaged in conduct which was discreditable to a barrister, prejudicial to the administration of justice and/or likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession or the administration of justice or otherwise bring the legal profession into disrepute, by:

(a) on or about 28th May 2009, knowing that a curatorship was in force and without informing the curator, he removed a suitcase containing silver from [the interdict’s] home and took it into his custody.

(b) on 11th September 2009, knowing that a curatorship was in force and without informing the curator, he procured by misrepresentation the transfer of [the interdict’s] periodic pension payments out of the control of the curator and into his client account,

for which conduct, charges of professional misconduct were found proved by the Royal Court of Jersey, as set out in its written judgment dated 13 November 2012.

Andrew Begg, an unregistered barrister, between July 2011 and February 2012, engaged in conduct which was discreditable to a barrister, prejudicial to the administration of justice and/or likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession or the administration of justice or otherwise bring the legal profession into disrepute, as set out in the attached Schedule, for which conduct, charges of professional misconduct were found proved by the Royal Court of Jersey, as set out in its written judgment dated 18 December 2014.

Andrew Begg, an unregistered barrister, acted in a manner which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in him or the profession, by:

Delaying dealing with correspondence and communications in respect of an estate matter between April 2018 and April 2019, and May 2019 and September 2019, for which conduct, charges of professional misconduct were found proved, and Mr Begg was removed from the roll of Advocates of the Court, by the Royal Court of Jersey, as set out in its written judgment dated 13 July 2022.

Andrew Begg, an unregistered barrister, acted in a manner which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in him or the profession, and/or acted in a manner which could reasonably be seen by the public to undermine his honesty and/or integrity, by:

(a) failing to forward to his client an open email sent on 27 March 2019 by the legal team acting for the other side in the matter (the “open e-mail”)

(b) altering a without prejudice save as to costs e-mail sent on 27 March 2019 by the legal team acting for the other side in the matter (the “without prejudice email”), by removing its date (which would have revealed it had been received several weeks before by Mr Begg) and the word “inordinate” from the phrase “inordinate delay”, before forwarding it to his client,

for which conduct, charges of professional misconduct were found proved, and Mr Begg was removed from the roll of Advocates of the Court, by the Royal Court of Jersey, as set out in its written judgment dated 13 July 2022.

Andrew Begg, an unregistered barrister, from 8 February 2010 to 6 January 2014, failed to report promptly to the Bar Standards Board that he had been charged with a disciplinary offence by another professional body, as set out in the written judgment of the Royal Court of Jersey dated 13 November 2012.

Andrew Begg, an unregistered barrister, between 13 November 2012 and 6 January 2014, failed to report promptly to the Bar Standards Board, that he had been convicted of a disciplinary offence by another professional body, as set out in the written judgment of the Royal Court of Jersey dated 13 November 2012.

Andrew Begg, an unregistered barrister, failed to comply with the obligations under rC65.3 in that between 6 January 2014 and 2 October 2014, he failed to report promptly to the Bar Standards Board or at all, that he was the subject of disciplinary proceedings or other regulatory or enforcement action by another regulator (The Law Society of Jersey), as set out in the written judgment of the Royal Court of Jersey dated 18 December 2014.

Andrew Begg, an unregistered barrister, failed to comply with the obligations under rC65.3 in that from 11 January 2021 to 4 July 2022, he failed to report promptly to the Bar Standards Board or at all, that he was the subject of disciplinary proceedings or other regulatory or enforcement action by another regulator (The Law Society of Jersey), as set out in the written judgment of the Royal Court of Jersey dated 13 July 2022.

Andrew Begg, an unregistered barrister, failed to comply with the obligations under rC65.7 in that, from 6 January 2014 and thereafter, he failed to report promptly to the Bar Standards Board that he had committed professional misconduct, namely that:

(a) on or about 28th May 2009, knowing that a curatorship was in force and without informing the curator, he removed a suitcase containing silver from [the interdict’s] home and took it into his custody.

(b) on 11th September 2009, knowing that a curatorship was in force and without informing the curator, he procured by misrepresentation the transfer of [the interdict’s] periodic pension payments out of the control of the curator and into his client account,

for which conduct, charges of professional misconduct were found proved by the Royal Court of Jersey, as set out in its written judgment dated 13 November 2012.

Andrew Begg, an unregistered barrister, failed to comply with the obligations under rC65.7 in that from 2 October 2014 and thereafter, he failed to report promptly to the Bar Standards Board that he had committed professional misconduct, as set out in the attached Schedule, for which conduct, charges of professional misconduct were found proved by the Royal Court of Jersey, as set out in its written judgment dated 18 December 2014.

SCHEDULE

(a) Between July 2011 and February 2012, Mr Begg failed to promote the best interests of his client in his conduct of her defence to a Petty Debts Court claim. In particular he:-

(i) failed to give her an estimate of the likely cost of his services once it was clear that the matter was proceeding towards a trial;

(ii) failed to keep her informed as the case progressed of the amount of work he was recording and the amount he was charging for it;

(iii) failed to keep his work and his charges proportionate to the size and nature of the case;

(iv) failed to advise her that there was a risk that she would lose at trial;

(v) failed to advise her that if she won at trial she would not recover a substantial part of his costs because they were so disproportionate; and

(vi) submitted a single invoice, only after the case was over, claiming £31,192.

(b) Between July 2011 and February 2012, while acting for his client in respect of a Petty Debts Court action which proceeded to trial, failed to canvass a resolution of the dispute on a positive and ongoing basis and in a fully informed manner with his client. In particular he:-

(i) failed throughout the engagement to encourage her to consider settling the case;

(ii) discouraged her from accepting a settlement offer that was made in January 2012.