Hearings, orders, and decisions

Name of Member:	Mr Edward Franklin ACA – 066558/MATT
Allegation	The Allegation is that Mr Edward Franklin ACA is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a.
Date of hearing:	1 – 4 December 2025
Time:	10:00
Place:	IDRC, 1 Paternoster Lane, St Paul’s, London, EC4M 7BQ

 

Name of Member:	Mr Andrew Dix, 075182/MATT
Allegation	The allegation is that Mr Andrew Dix is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a (effective from 1 June 2023).
Date of hearing:	17 November 2025
Time:	10:00
Place:	Remote hearing – for more details, please contact vanessa.broxham@icaew.com

 

Name of Member:	Mrs. Patricia Jane Grahamslaw, 069344/MATT
Allegation	The allegation is that Mrs Patricia Jane Grahamslaw is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1c (effective between 14 October 2019 and 31 May 2023 and from 1 June 2023).
Date of hearing:	17 October 2025
Time:	10:00
Place:	Remote hearing – for more details, please contact vanessa.broxham@icaew.com

 

Name of Member:	Mr Richard Jonathan Owen Rees – 062446/MATT
Allegation	The allegation is that Mr Richard Jonathan Owen Rees is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1h.
Date of hearing:	15 October 2025
Time:	10:00
Place:	Remote hearing – please contact diane.waller@icaew.com for details

 

Name of Respondent:	Mr Christopher Neil Bailey, 053495/MATT
Allegation	The allegation is that Mr Christopher Neil Bailey is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a and 4.1b
Date of hearing:	29 September, 1 and 2 October 2025
Time:	10:00
Place:	Remote hearing – for more details, please contact vanessa.broxham@icaew.com

 

Name of Respondent:	Mr Alan Roger Mott FCA – 071032/MATT
Allegation	The allegation is that Mr Alan Roger Mott FCA is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1c.
Date of hearing:	15 September 2025
Time:	11:30
Place:	Remote hearing please contact diane.waller@icaew.com for details

 

Name of Respondent:	Mr Mark Broadhead, 074270/MATT
Allegation	The allegation is that Mr Mark Broadhead is liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1c .
Date of hearing:	11 September 2025
Time:	10:00
Place:	Remote hearing please contact vanessa.broxham@icaew.com for details

If you think your hearing should be held in private, you must make an application in writing to the Head of Committees and Tribunals. The regulations governing such an application can be found in the Investigation and Disciplinary Regulations.

An application needs to be made within 21 days of service of the documents sent by the Head of Committees and Tribunals further to Regulation 39.2 of the Investigation and Disciplinary Regulations. These are the documents sent once allegations have been referred from the Conduct Committee to the Tribunals Committee.

An application can be made by ICAEW's Conduct Department or by the subject of the formal allegation(s) under regulation 39.1(b) and 39.2(c), as appropriate. If the subject of the formal allegation(s) makes an application under regulation 39.2(c), Conduct Counsel may file a written response to the Head of Committees and Tribunals 7 days before the case management hearing.

The application will be determined by the case management chair at the case management hearing subject to the requirements of the Investigation and Disciplinary Regulations 39.1, 39.2 and 43.1.

Pursuant to regulation 43.2, the case management chair may decide that the press and public shall be excluded from the whole or any part of the final hearing where it appears appropriate to do so in the interests of justice or for any other exceptional reason provided that:

a. the circumstances of the case outweigh the public interest in holding a public hearing; and

b. the case management chair making the decision is satisfied that the parties have had an opportunity to make representations.

The case management chair shall give the parties a summary of reasons for allowing or dismissing any application made under regulation 39.1(b) or 39.2(c). An application can also be made to a panel of the Tribunals Committee at any final hearing, if the applying party can demonstrate that they could not have made the application at the case management hearing, as outlined above.

At the final hearing, you may still ask the Tribunals Committee panel whether it is prepared to proceed in private. This would usually be on the first day of a hearing, but the panel can exercise the power to sit in private at any stage, even if none of the parties have asked it to do so; for example, if it is necessary to protect the identity of a third party. However, we can never guarantee anonymity.

When a panel agrees to hold all or part of the hearing in private, it gives its reasons on the day, and in public, unless such reasons as are given, do not, in the opinion of the panel, unreasonably undermine the purpose of proceeding in private. The panel also gives these reasons in writing if the formal allegations are found proved.

The panel has the power to proceed in private by excluding the press or public from the whole or any part of a hearing, whether or not the parties ask it to do so. It can do this at any stage of a hearing. When it decides whether to exclude anyone, the panel considers:

• the interests of justice
• any other special reason or
• the circumstances of the case

The panel will assess whether these factors outweigh the public interest in holding a public hearing. The panel must also be satisfied that both parties have been given an opportunity to make representations.

This section lists a summary of all recent disciplinary decisions (apart from cases found not proved). All of these decisions can go to an Appeal Committee upon successful application. We do not publish details of cases where the formal allegations are found not proved, or where a decision has been made that the matter should not be published. A full report of decisions is available in the ‘Full reports of disciplinary orders and regulatory decisions’ section below.  

---

Tribunals Committee Tribunal summary of decision

Mr Philip Trevor Woolmer of Rochester, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Tribunals Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal allegation on 11 August 2025.

Type of Member Member

Terms of allegation

On 6 September 2024, at Maidstone Crown Court, Mr Philip Woolmer FCA was convicted of the following indictable offences:

i) Voyeurism - On or in 16 June 2022 at Rochester in the County of Kent operated equipment, namely a camera, for the purpose of obtaining sexual gratification, contrary to s.67 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

ii) Take an indecent photograph / pseudo-photograph [PRIVATE] – On 16 June 2022 at Rochester in the County of Kent took indecent photographs [PRIVATE], contrary to [PRIVATE].

Mr Philip Woolmer is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1e (effective from 1 June 2023)

Finding: Allegation proved

Order:

Excluded from membership with a recommendation that no application for readmission to membership by Mr Woolmer should be entertained for a period of 15 years from the date of this decision.

To pay costs to ICAEW in the sum of £8,227.50.

This decision may be subject to appeal

---

Tribunals Committee Tribunal summary of decision

Mr Sachin Sharma of Birmingham, United Kingdom

A Tribunal of the Tribunals Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal allegation on 23 July 2025.

Type of Member Provisional Member

Terms of allegation

On or around 27 September 2022, Mr Sachin Sharma submitted his ‘A’ case study mock exam for assessment which plagiarised the work of a colleague, whose answer he had requested.

In copying and submitting the work as his own when he knew it was not, this conduct was contrary to subsection R111.1 of ICAEW’s Code of Ethics – Integrity (effective 1 January 2020).

Mr Sachin Sharma is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a (effective bye-laws from 14 October 2019 to 31 May 2023)

Finding: Allegation proved on own admission

Order:
Severely Reprimand
Pay a Financial Penalty of £700
Pay costs of £2,300

This decision may be subject to appeal

---

Tribunals Committee Tribunal summary of decision

Mr Paul Land of North Yorkshire, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Tribunals Committee made the decision recorded below having heard the formal allegations on 20 and 21 May 2025, 30 June 2025 and 10 July 2025.

Type of Member Member

Terms of allegation

2. Between 18 September 2019 and 7 February 2021, Mr Paul Land FCA, when responding to HMRC’s enquiry into ‘D’s Corporation Tax Return for the year ended 30 June 2015, failed to undertake the following:

   1. Provide a complete response to HMRC’s letter dated 18 November 2019 by the response deadline of 30 December 2019, or not at all; and / or
   2. Provide a complete response to the information notice dated 12 March 2020 issued by HMRC under paragraph 1 of Schedule 36 to the Finance Act 2008 by the response deadline of 10 April 2020, or not at all.

   In doing so, Mr Land knew, or should have known, that this conduct may discredit the profession, contrary to section 150.1 (Professional Behaviour) of the ICAEW Code of Ethics (effective 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2019) and subsection R115.1 (Professional Behaviour) of ICAEW’s Code of Ethics (effective from 1 January 2020).

   Mr Land is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1b of the Disciplinary Bye-laws effective from 15 October 2018 to 31 May 2023.

3. Between 1 July 2015 and 30 November 2015, Mr Paul Land FCA was responsible for the preparation of the unaudited financial statements for the following entities, which did not comply with UK Generally Accepted Accounting Practice (UK GAAP) for the following reasons:

   A. ‘D’ year ended 30 June 2015

   1. the financial statements did not comply with the Financial Reporting Standard for Smaller Entities (effective April 2008) in that:
      1. an addition of £600,000 to goodwill was included in the financial statements when no goodwill had been acquired, which is not in accordance with paragraphs 6.11 and 6.12 and / or the definition of ‘purchased goodwill’; and / or
      2. the unpaid consideration of £600,000 relating to the sale by ‘A’ of its trade, assets and liabilities to ‘D’ was not included in creditors and shown as due to ‘A’, but was credited to the loan accounts of the directors of ‘D’ and shown as due to the directors; and / or
      3. the related party transactions disclosure note was incorrect in that it stated on 30 November 2014 ‘D’ acquired the trade, assets and liabilities from ‘A’ when the trade of ‘A’ continued after that date and no assets or liabilities were acquired by ‘D’; and / or
      4. the related party transactions disclosure note in relation to any transaction between ‘D’ and ‘A’ was incomplete because the following information was missing:
         1. a description of the relationship between the parties as required by paragraph 15.1(c)(ii); and / or
         2. the amount of the transaction as required by paragraph 15.1(c)(iv); and / or
         3. the amount due to ‘A’ at the balance sheet date as required by paragraph 15.1(c)(vi).

   B. ‘A’ - year ended 30 June 2015

   1. the financial statements did not comply with the Financial Reporting Standard for Smaller Entities (effective April 2008) in that:
      1. the related party transactions disclosure note was incorrect in that it stated on 30 November 2014 ‘A’ transferred its trade assets and liabilities to ‘D’ when none of the assets or liabilities were transferred and ‘A’s’ trade continued after the year end; and / or
      2. the related party transactions disclosure note was incomplete because the following information was missing:
         1. the amount of the transaction as required by paragraph 15.1(c)(iv); and / or
         2. the amount due from ‘D’ at the balance sheet date as required by paragraph 15.1(c)(vi).
      3. the sale proceeds of £600,000 due in respect of the sale of ‘A’s’ business to ‘D’ were not disclosed as profit on disposal in the ‘A’s profit and loss account, understating the profit for the year by £600,000.

   Mr Land failed to act diligently in accordance with applicable technical and professional standards in accordance with section 130.1 (Professional Competence and Due Care) of the ICAEW Code of Ethics (effective from 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2019).

   Mr Land is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1b of the Disciplinary Bye-laws effective from 24 July 2013 to 31 December 2015.

Finding: Allegations 2 and 3 found proved

Order:
Severe Reprimand
To pay fine of £15,500 and costs of £18,845.55

This decision may be subject to appeal

---

Tribunals Committee Tribunal summary of decision

Mr Lewis Edmondson of Plymouth, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Tribunal's Committee made the decision recorded below having heard the formal allegations on 8 July 2025

Type of Member Provisional Member

Terms of allegation:

1A. On or around 8 March 2022, Mr Lewis Edmondson stated in a chat conversation with his people manager that he had attempted and passed his ICAEW Certificate Level Accounting exams when he had not done so.

This conduct was dishonest because Mr Edmondson knew at the time he made the statement that he had not passed the ICAEW Certificate Level exam.

Mr Lewis Edmondson is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Byelaw 4.1a (effective between 14 October 2019 and 31 May 2023).

On or around 8 March 2022, Mr Lewis Edmondson falsified ICAEW exam reports and presented them to show that:

• On 26 February 2022 he had attempted and passed the Assurance exam with a mark of 65; and/or
• On 4 March 2022 he had attempted and passed the Accounting exam with a mark of 63.

The conduct was dishonest because Mr Edmondson knew he had not passed the aforesaid exams.

Mr Lewis Edmondson is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Byelaw 4.1a (effective between 14 October 2019 and 31 May 2023).

2A On or around 31 March 2022, Mr Lewis Edmondson stated during a job interview that he had been dismissed by his previous employer because he had failed an ACA exam, which was not true.

This conduct was dishonest because Mr Edmondson knew he had been dismissed for presenting falsified ICAEW exam certificates and/or fraudulently claiming that he had passed exams when he had not.

Mr Lewis Edmondson is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Byelaw 4.1a (effective between 14 October 2019 and 31 May 2023).

2B On or around 31 March 2022, Mr Lewis Edmondson stated during a job interview that he had been dismissed by his previous employer because he had failed an ACA exam, which was not true.

This conduct lacked integrity because Mr Edmondson knew he had been dismissed for presenting falsified ICAEW exam certificates and/or fraudulently claiming that he had passed exams when he had not. For Mr Edmondson to say otherwise was materially false and contrary to ICAEW's Code of Ethics (effective from 1 January 2020).

Mr Lewis Edmondson is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1a (effective between 14 October 2019 and 31 May 2023)1.

Finding: All allegations found proved

Order:
Provisional membership status withdrawn and Mr Edmondson is ineligible to reapply for 2 years.
Pay costs of £6,000

This decision may be subject to appeal.

---

Tribunals Committee Tribunal summary of decision

Mr Balraj Oberoi of Cheam, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Tribunals Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal allegation on 2 July 2025

Type of Member Provisional Member

Terms of allegation:

1. On or around 30 May 2023 Mr Balraj Oberoi submitted his mock Audit and Assurance exam to his training provider ‘A’, which plagiarised information from the model answer, when he knew, or should have known, that he should not do so.
   
   Mr Oberoi’s actions were contrary to R.115.1 of ICAEW’s Code of Ethics (effective from 1 January 2020).
   
   Mr Oberoi is therefore liable to disciplinary action under disciplinary bye-law 4.1a (effective between 14 October 2019 and 31 May 2023 and from 1 June 2023).

Finding: Allegation found proved

Order:
Status as a provisional member withdrawn and ineligible to re-register for such status for a period of 2 years 
Pay costs of £9,000

This decision may be subject to appeal.

---

Tribunals Committee Tribunal summary of decision

Hilden Park Accountants Limited of East Sussex, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Tribunals Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal allegation on 26 June 2025.

Type of Member Member

Terms of allegation:

Allegations against Hilden Park Accountants Limited

1. Between 5 December 2012 and 26 February 2016, Hilden Park Accountants Limited issued unqualified audit opinions on the financial statements of ‘A’ Limited.  The audit reports stated that the audit was conducted in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (‘ISA’), when it was not, in that the audit did not comply with ISA 500 ‘Audit Evidence’ as the auditor failed to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence in relation to a loan payable amount for the following financial periods:

   1. year ended 31 May 2012, audit report dated 5 December 2012; and/or
   2. year ended 31 May 2013, audit report dated 28 February 2014 and/or
   3. year ended 31 May 2014, audit report dated 26 February 2015; and/or
   4. year ended 31 May 2015, audit report dated 26 February 2016.
   
   

   Hilden Park Accountants Limited is therefore liable to disciplinary action under DBL 6.2a (effective from 29 September 2011, 24 July 2013 and 1 January 2016 to 2 October 2016).




2. Between 5 December 2012 and 5 May 2017, Hilden Park Accountants Limited issued unqualified audit opinions on the group financial statements of ‘B’ Limited. The audit reports stated that the audit was conducted in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (‘ISA’), when it was not, in that the audit did not comply with ISA 500 ‘Audit Evidence’ as the auditor failed to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence in relation to a loan payable amount for the following financial periods:

   1. year ended 31 May 2012, audit report dated 5 December 2012; and/or
   2. year ended 31 May 2013, audit report dated 3 December 2013 and/or
   3. year ended 31 May 2014, audit report dated 26 February 2015; and/or
   4. year ended 31 May 2015, audit report dated 26 February 2016; and/or
   5. year ended 31 May 2016, audit report dated 5 May 2017.
   
   

   Hilden Park Accountants Limited is therefore liable to disciplinary action under DBL 6.2a (effective from 29 September 2011, 24 July 2013, 1 January 2016 and 3 October 2016 to 10 October 2017).




3. On or around 5 June 2018, Hilden Park Accountants Limited issued an unqualified audit opinion on the group financial statements of ‘B’ Limited for the year ended 31 May 2017. The audit report stated that the audit was conducted in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (‘ISA’), when it was not, in that, the audit did not comply with ISA 500 ‘Audit Evidence’ because the auditor failed to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence in relation to certain liabilities.

   Hilden Park Accountants Limited is therefore liable to disciplinary action under DBL 6.2a (effective from 11 October 2017 to 14 October 2018).

Finding: Proved by own admission

Order:
Severely Reprimanded
To pay fines of £28,000 and costs of £9,747

This decision may be subject to appeal.

---

Tribunals Committee Tribunal summary of decision

Mr Roger John Anderton of Ormskirk, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Tribunals Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal allegation on 24 June 2025.

Type of Member Member

Terms of allegation:

Between 15 December 2023 and 5 January 2024, Mr Roger Anderton FCA failed to provide the information, explanations and documents requested by letter dated 15 December 2023, issued in accordance with Investigation and Disciplinary Regulation 16.1. This was contrary to Disciplinary Bye-law 8.

Mr Roger Anderton FCA is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1c (effective from 1 June 2023).

Finding: Proved by own admission

Order:
Severely Reprimanded.
To pay fine of £2,550 and costs of £9,560.

This decision may be subject to appeal.

---

Disciplinary Committee Tribunal summary of decision

Mr Mohommad Shaikh of Croydon, United Kingdom

A tribunal of the Tribunals Committee made the decision recorded below having heard the formal allegations on 6 June 2025.

Type of Member Member

Terms of allegation:

Between 13 December 2022 and 30 May 2024 Mr Mohommad Shaikh (FCA) failed to cooperate with the Practice Assurance Committee in carrying out its functions under the Practice Assurance Scheme, by not providing in full the information listed below requested in an email dated 3 August 2022, as requested by the PAC on 17 November 2022:

1. A completed Firm Wide Risk Assessment; and/or
2. Confirmation that Mr Shaikh would carry out an AML risk assessment, taking into account those risks identified in the firm-wide risk assessment and submit this to ICAEW; and/or
3. Provide to ICAEW a completed example of CDD (including risk assessment) for an existing client; and/or
4. Provide details of planned AML training that Mr Shaikh intends to undertake; and/or
5. Provide evidence from the ICO that Mr Shaikh is exempt from DPA registration and/or
6. Confirmation that Mr Shaikh would update his letters of engagement and that a revised copy would be issued to all clients and that he would provide copy of the updated letter of engagement to ICAEW.

Mr Mohammad Shaikh (FCA’s) conduct is contrary to Practice Assurance Regulation 12 (effective from 1 July 2019 to 31 May 2023 and 1 June 2023).

Finding: Allegations a–f found proved

Order:
Excluded from ICAEW Membership
To pay fines of £15,000 and costs of £8,750

This decision may be subject to appeal.

---

Tribunals Committee tribunal summary of decision

Mr Chung Wah Tang of Causeway Bay, Hong Kong

A tribunal of the Tribunal Committee made the decision recorded below having heard a formal allegation on 06 March 2025

Type of Member Member

1. Between 11 July 2023 and 28 July 2023, Mr Chung Tang FCA failed to provide the information and documents requested by letter dated 11 July 2023, issued in accordance with Investigation and Disciplinary Regulation 16.1, contrary to Disciplinary Bye-law 8.1.

Mr Chung Tang FCA is therefore liable to disciplinary action under Disciplinary Bye-law 4.1c as follows:

Disciplinary Bye-laws effective from 1 June 2023

4.1 A member, affiliate or relevant person shall be liable to disciplinary action under these Disciplinary Bye-laws in any of the following cases, regardless of whether they were a member, affiliate or relevant person at the time of the event(s) giving rise to that liability:

c. if they have committed a breach of the bye-laws, or of any regulations, statutory regulations or the IDRs or have failed to comply with any order, direction or requirement made, given or imposed under them.

Finding:

Allegation proved on Mr Tang’s own admission.

Order:

Severe Reprimand

Fined £1400

Pay costs of £5159

This decision may be subject to appeal

---

This section lists all disciplinary and regulatory decisions published in the last five years. If you have any questions about decisions that are not listed here, please call +44 (0)1908 546 293.

Disciplinary decisions made under ICAEW's bye-laws must be published unless there is a decision by a committee not to do so.

Once a report has been removed from this page, details of cases may still be available on other websites or in search results.

2025

• 6 August 2025
• 6 August 2025
• 24 July 2025
• 17 July 2025
• 2 July 2025
• 11 June 2025
• 4 June 2025
• 7 May 2025
• 2 April 2025
• 18 March 2025
• 5 March 2025
• 7 February 2025
• 7 February 2025
• 5 February 2025
• 5 February 2025
• 8 January 2025

2024

• 28 December 2024
• 4 December 2024
• 28 November 2024
• 28 November 2024
• 21 November 2024
• 12 November 2024
• 6 November 2024
• 5 November 2024
• 2 October 2024
• 20 September 2024
• 4 September 2024
• 7 August 2024
• 6 August 2024
• 19 July 2024
• 17 July 2024
• 9 July 2024
• 3 July 2024
• 5 June 2024
• 8 May 2024
• 1 May 2024
• 25 April 2024
• 3 April 2024
• 21 March 2024
• 6 March 2024
• 19 February 2024
• 7 February 2024
• 3 January 2024

2023

• 6 December 2023
• 1 November 2023
• 25 October 2023
• 4 October 2023
• 4 October 2023
• 11 September 2023
• 6 September 2023
• 4 September 2023
• 4 September 2023
• 2 August 2023
• 27 July 2023
• 17 July 2023
• 13 July 2023
• 13 July 2023
• 5 July 2023
• 20 June 2023
• 20 June 2023
• 20 June 2023
• 20 June 2023
• 15 June 2023
• 7 June 2023
• 23 May 2023
• 3 May 2023
• 6 April 2023
• 5 April 2023
• 1 March 2023
• 1 February 2023
• 11 January 2023
• 4 January 2023

 

2022

• 7 December 2022
• 23 November 2022
• 14 November 2022
  
• 2 November 2022
• 5 October 2022
• 7 September 2022
• 3 August 2022
• 6 July 2022
• 1 June 2022
• 4 May 2022
• 6 April 2022
• 2 March 2022
• 21 February 2022
• 2 February 2022
• 20 January 2022
• 20 January 2022
• 5 January 2022

 

2021

• 1 December 2021
• 3 November 2021
• 28 October 2021
• 6 October 2021
• 7 September 2021
• 1 September 2021
• 19 August 2021
• 4 August 2021
• 7 July 2021
• 6 July 2021