A former director at international firm Gowling WLG feels ‘deep regret’ for his misjudgment in forming a ‘fantasy sexual relationship’ with a junior colleague, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal heard today.
Oliver Edward Bretherton, admitted in 2007, faces multiple allegations of misconduct relating to three different women. Closing submissions for the substantive hearing, which started earlier this year, began this week.
Chloe Carpenter, for Bretherton, said: ‘It is a very sad case and a matter of deep regret that he made the misjudgments [regarding the incidents before the tribunal].’
Talking about the ‘judgment’ and ‘the underlying tone of assumption’ used by Nimi Bruce, for the SRA, during cross examination, Carpenter said: ‘I submit the reason the SRA resorted to that approach is because the lack of any evidence that supports their case. A prosecutor with a strong case does not resort to theatrics because they do not need to.’
She told the tribunal that Person A, who cannot be named, accepted that ‘the relationship was correctly characterised as a fantasy sexual relationship’. She said it was common ground that Bretherton, who is married, and Person A had never had a physical relationship apart from a kiss during a night out.
She said: ‘There was never any sexual relationship at all. [There was] no attempt by Mr Bretherton to turn the relationship into a physical sexual relationship.’
Carpenter told the three-person panel that the SRA ‘are not arbitrators of sexual morality’. She added: ‘The tribunal needs to focus on the evidence and relevant points that bring this matter within the regulatory sphere.’
The tribunal heard that Person A ended the relationship in October 2018 in a message stating she felt uncomfortable and ‘the relationship stopped immediately’.
Carpenter added: ‘[There is] no allegation of lack of consent in regard to Person A… this was a consensual relationship.’
Making submissions on Person A’s evidence, Carpenter said: ‘Years of discussions with a therapist have completely distorted her recollection of events.’
She told the tribunal that most of the relationship took place outside of work and Bretherton’s conduct did not amount to lack of integrity.
She said: ‘[Bretherton] was not a partner or a supervisor, he was not in a position to favour or punish [Person A] in respect of work and never did so. He never used or abused his seniority, it never even occurred to him that his seniority was relevant.
‘It was a consensual relationship between two adults.’
She added: ‘If the SRA’s case or assertion that any relationship with a difference in seniority leads to the more senior person having lack of integrity then it would be impossible for any relationship between colleagues taking place save for [those] being the same or near the same position. [That would cause a] chilling effect in the profession to the detriment of men and women in the profession.’
In closing, Carpenter told the panel the case had caused Bretherton ‘incredible distress and damage to all aspects of his life’ and urged the tribunal to ‘cast aside the sensationlist way the SRA has conducted these proceedings’. She added that Bretherton had made ‘misjudgments and mistakes’ and had ‘apologised on numerous occasions’ but that he never controlled Person A and did not act in a sexually motivated way toward Person B or C.
Bretherton, who now works for virtual firm Gunnercooke, denies acting without integrity. The hearing continues.
