LCRO 276/2013+293/2013+242/2016 CS v VN, PR and ZW ZM v VC [pdf, 274 KB]
...purpose of causing unnecessary embarrassment, distress or inconvenience to any person’s reputation interests or occupation, including the complainants’. [76] Mr CS wanted to be paid. He initiated appropriate processes in Mr DH’s name, and resources were deployed accordingly. [77] The evidence does not support a finding that Mr CS contravened rule 2.3. [78] This aspect of the Committee’s decision is confirmed. Rule 11.1 and 13.1 [79] Rule 11.1 prohibited Mr CS from enga...