A solicitor who acted for former Conservative Party chair Nadhim Zahawi has overturned a conviction imposed by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), in a ruling centred on a 'without prejudice' email at the heart of the case.

The appeal succeeds on the basis of the 'without prejudice' email that had featured in the disciplinary proceedings. The SDT, the first-instance tribunal that adjudicates misconduct allegations against solicitors in England and Wales, had previously found against the practitioner. The appeal court has now set that finding aside.

'Without prejudice' is a long-established legal privilege in English law. It protects genuine settlement negotiations from being put before a court or tribunal as evidence of admissions. Communications made in a genuine attempt to settle a dispute cannot generally be relied upon in later litigation, including disciplinary proceedings, unless an exception applies.

The outcome turns on that principle. Where a tribunal has taken a 'without prejudice' communication into account, or where such a communication has formed part of the evidential foundation of a finding of misconduct, the resulting decision is vulnerable on appeal. The ruling in this case confirms that the protection extends to regulatory and disciplinary proceedings brought against solicitors, not only to civil litigation between opposing parties.

The practical significance for practitioners is direct. Solicitors who engage in settlement correspondence remain entitled to the protection of 'without prejudice' privilege in respect of that correspondence, even if they themselves later become the subject of a disciplinary investigation. The decision also serves as a reminder to those conducting regulatory and disciplinary hearings: 'without prejudice' material must be kept out of the tribunal's consideration unless a recognised exception to the rule, such as an alleged act of undue influence or improper conduct falling within the established carve-outs, is properly engaged and established.

For the solicitor concerned, the effect of the appeal is that the SDT's finding against him no longer stands. The conviction has been overturned.

The case attracted public attention because of the identity of the solicitor's former client. Nadhim Zahawi, formerly chancellor of the exchequer and Conservative Party chair, was the subject of significant controversy over his tax affairs. The disciplinary proceedings against his solicitor, and the appeal that has now concluded in the solicitor's favour, arose in that wider context.

The ruling reinforces the boundaries that regulate the use of settlement material in the professional discipline of lawyers in England and Wales. Tribunals and prosecutors must assess at an early stage whether any evidence they intend to rely on attracts 'without prejudice' protection. If it does, and no exception is made out, the material must be excluded. Failure to do so can prove fatal to the proceedings, as this appeal demonstrates.