Incident Tracker

Bandla v Solicitors Regulation Authority, [2025] EWHC 1167 (Admin)

costs-order

Before the High Court (Administrative Court), struck-off solicitor Venkateshwarlu Bandla cited around 27 non-existent authorities in his appeal against removal from the roll. Fordham J struck out his grounds as an abuse of process and ordered £24,727.20 in indemnity costs. Bandla denied using AI, attributing the fake citations to unverified Google searches.

Date of decision/order

2025-05-13

Court

High Court of England and Wales (King's Bench Division, Administrative Court)

Jurisdiction

UK

AI tool

Not identified in the record

Conduct

A former solicitor, appearing in person to appeal his removal from the roll, cited a large number of authorities in formal documents before the court; the SRA identified around 27 as non-existent. He denied using AI, attributing the citations to un-verified Google searches.

Consequence

GBP 24,727.2

Regulatory outcome

Solicitors Regulation Authority: The appellant had already been struck from the roll of solicitors by the SRA; the fabricated-authority conduct arose in his (unsuccessful) High Court appeal against that strike-off decision. (2025-05-13)