Aneil Naeeem
Solicitor
356798

Decision - Sanction

Outcome: Rebuke

Outcome date: 1 June 2026

Published date: 4 June 2026

Firm details

Firm or organisation at date of publication and at time of matters giving rise to outcome

Name: Amicus Solicitors Ltd

Address(es): 761 Wilmslow Road, Manchester

Firm ID: 627023

Outcome details

This outcome was reached by SRA decision.

Decision details

1. Agreed Outcome

1. Mr Aneil Naeem (Mr Naeem) a solicitor, manager, owner, Head of Legal Practice (HOLP) and Head of Finance and Administration (HOFA) of Amicus Solicitor Limited (the Firm), agrees to the following outcome to the investigation of his conduct by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA):

1. he is rebuked
2. to the publication of this agreement
3. he will pay the costs of the investigation of £300.

2. Summary of Facts

2.1 Between December 2021 and May 2023, Mr Naeem authorised and facilitated the payment of client damages to third parties without ensuring that the clients had given properly informed consent, notwithstanding that written authorities were held on file. In doing so, he failed to verify instructions directly with the clients and relied on introducer-led authorities which were insufficient to demonstrate informed consent.

3. Admissions

3.1. Mr Naeem makes the following admissions which the SRA accepts:

1. Mr Naeem accepted that the client consent recorded on the files was not sufficient to constitute properly informed consent before damages were paid to third parties, and that, as a result, he failed to act in the best interests of each client, contrary to Principle 7 of the SRA Principles.
2. He accepted that he relied on written authorities and third-party communications, rather than satisfying himself that the instructions genuinely represented the clients’ wishes, contrary to paragraph 3.1 of the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors.

4. Why a written rebuke is an appropriate outcome

4.1. The SRA’s Enforcement Strategy sets out its approach to the use of its enforcement powers where there has been a failure to meet its standards or requirements.

4.2. When considering the appropriate sanctions and controls in this matter, the SRA has taken into account the admissions made by Mr Naeem and the following mitigation which he has put forward:

1. Mr Naeem believed at the time that valid authority was in place
2. He did not derive any personal financial benefit
3. He has demonstrated insight, accepting that the regulatory standard for informed consent is high and he should have made direct contact with each client
4. He has cooperated fully with the SRA’s investigation
5. He has taken remedial steps, including reviewing and tightening the Firm’s approach to referral arrangements and client consent

4.3. The SRA considers that a written rebuke is the appropriate outcome because:

1. Client money was paid to third parties without properly informed consent
2. Reliance was placed on introducer-led authorities and communications
3. The conduct affected several clients
4. Mr Naeem was the supervising solicitor and HOFA
5. The circumstances involved referral arrangements and third-party financial interests

5. Publication

5.1 The SRA considers it appropriate that this agreement is published in the interests of transparency in the regulatory and disciplinary process. Mr Naeem agrees to the publication of this agreement.

6. Acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement

6.1. Mr Naeem agrees that he will not deny the admissions made in this agreement or act in any way which is inconsistent with it.

6.2. If Mr Naeem denies the admissions, or acts in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement, the conduct which is subject to this agreement may be considered further by the SRA. That may result in a disciplinary outcome or a referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on the original facts and allegations.

6.3. Denying the admissions made or acting in a way which is inconsistent with this agreement may also constitute a separate breach of principles 2 and 5 of the Principles and paragraph 7.3 of the Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs and RFLs.

7. Costs

7.1. Mr Naeem agrees to pay the costs of the SRA's investigation in the sum of £300. Such costs are due within 28 days of a statement of costs due being issued by the SRA.