In-house solicitor fined for offensive nicknames and emails


Emails: SRA warning notice on offensive communications

A senior in-house solicitor who coined offensive nicknames for colleagues and sent sweary emails has been fined £15,000 by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT).

It said Benedict Foster had struggled with managerial changes occurring at BNP Paribas but “failed to handle this with the standards expected of a solicitor of his experience and standing”.

He admitted that he had repeatedly used “inappropriate, unprofessional and rude nicknames for his colleagues” during 2021, although only one of them was aware of it.

The ones for which he was sanctioned were ‘Hu She’ – for an East Asian solicitor – ‘Mad Paul’, ‘Pol Pot’, ‘The idiot’, ‘Jabba the Hutt’ and ‘The Twittering Fool’.

Mr Foster, full name Leo Benedict Michael, is 64 and qualified in 1988. He had worked at the bank since 1993 and at the time was head of the London debt and equity markets team.

The SDT was told that the man he called ‘Mad Paul’ made a complaint about Mr Foster’s behaviour towards him, and the use of inappropriate nicknames and language, which led to a disciplinary meeting in December 2021.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) became aware of the matter the following month after the newspaper City AM published an article entitled ‘BNP Paribas London executive keeps job despite naming Asian colleague “Hu She”’.

The colleague and then the bank subsequently reported Mr Foster to the SRA, as did a member of the public who saw the article.

The SDT recorded: “Following the press coverage of the matter, the bank invited Mr Foster to a further disciplinary hearing.

“However, ultimately the bank negotiated an exit with Mr Foster, who had indicated his desire to retire from practice. He left the bank on 31 March 2022, without the re-convened disciplinary hearing taking place.”

He admitted that the ‘Hu She’ nickname undermined the lawyer, “suggesting that she was absent, irrelevant or unknown. Further, it was accepted that the mocking of her name showed a clear lack of respect for a colleague”.

Mr Foster was also found to have used offensive and/or inappropriate language in various emails: he referred to senior colleagues “cunts”; ended an email with “Fuck knows”; sent messages that simply said, “What the fuck is this?” and “Looks like a bunch of cock”; and asked if another individual was “autistic”.

Mr Foster accepted that he should have conducted himself in line with the expectations set out in the SRA’s warning notice on offensive communications, first published in 2017.

He was found to have damaged public trust and lacked integrity and also, in relation to the nicknames, breached the requirement to encourage equality, diversity and inclusion.

His counsel said Mr Foster was “extremely apologetic”. He pointed out that the full context of Mr Foster’s emails showed that his language was the “result of his frustration and irritation at the decisions being made by the management team”.

The media coverage had been “extremely shocking and distressing” too. “He felt ashamed and had received public opprobrium at every level.”

In deciding the sanction, the SDT noted that Mr Foster had demonstrated insight and remorse, and had cooperated fully both with the bank’s internal investigation and the SRA.

He was also ordered to pay costs of £16,000.




    Readers Comments

  • Ravinder Singh Chumber says:

    The fun solicitor, gone.

  • Sara says:

    Solicitors and Barristers get punished by SDT for “hurty words” but when it comes £multimlion financial and property SDT says, ” no case to answer” . These regulators appear to be hoodwinking the public and should have an inquiry into their own conduct.


Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog


Why you should be using AI – but for the boring stuff

The legal industry is excited about AI. That’s good. But the direction of that excitement isn’t always useful. It’s the really dull tasks where AI could make a visible difference quickly.


Building your law firm’s generative AI strategy

It’s understandable that fully integrating GenAI within any business can feel daunting. This is why the focus should be on having a vision and starting the journey now.


Why better domestic abuse screening in mediation is long overdue

If there’s one thing the legal profession could do today, it would be to make domestic abuse and safeguarding training mandatory for all family lawyers and mediators.


Loading animation
loading