Solicitor struck off for dishonesty following tribunal

Malcolm Glynn, 55, who was appointed as deputy head of legal services at Blackpool Council in March 2020, was found to have acted dishonestly by a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.

The allegations dated back to the time prior to him joining Blackpool Council, when he worked for Cumbrian-based Progression Solicitors.

The tribunal ruled he had sought to hide his friendship with a convicted money launderer and had therefore breached the position of trust placed in him.

The tribunal judgement said Mr Glynn’s actions had not been motivated by financial gain, but he had “made statements that he knew to be untrue.”

Part of Mr Glynn’s mitigation was his recent record of good service at Blackpool Council, with the council’s head of legal services Dawn Goodall providing a statement to the tribunal.

Documents included in the judgement said the council “was aware of the allegations and was fully supportive of him.

“His employer described Mr Glynn as being diligent, approachable, extremely knowledgeable and supportive.”

He was in charge of a team of three lawyers and two legal support officers, and had been “described by the corporate leadership team at the council as an asset to the redevelopment of Blackpool.”

The judgement added: “Ms Goodall also explained that she found it difficult to reconcile the character of Mr Glynn that had been portrayed by his previous employer with the person with whom she had been working closely.”

However the tribunal, which published its judgement on June 21, ordered Mr Glynn to be struck off.

It said mitigation “was not sufficient to establish that this was a case where exceptional circumstances existed.

“The nature, scope and extent of the dishonesty, whilst taking place over a relatively short period of time, was extensive. Mr Glynn had made, andrepeated, a number of statements that he knew to be untrue, both to his employer and to the SRA (Solicitors Regulation Authority).”

A spokesperson for Blackpool Council said: “We are aware of the matter but cannot comment any further at this time due its confidential nature”