The information request related to a complaint by Mr Bellamy’s former client about a civil matter from 2017. In 2022, the former client complained to the Lawyers’ Complaints Service that Mr Bellamy had failed to arrange payment of money owing as a result of the proceedings and failed to respond to requests for updates. Mr Bellamy was provided a copy of the complaint and invited to respond. When he failed to do so, the Committee sent an information request requiring him to forward copies of all files, documents, correspondence, file notes and time records held in relation to work undertaken for the client. Mr Bellamy failed to comply with the notice despite being given numerous opportunities to respond.  

Mr Bellamy engaged in similar conduct before the Tribunal and did not file any affidavit or submissions. However, he did attend the hearing where he accepted the charge and noted that he had not responded to the complaint because he had never filed the proceedings as he became distracted by other matters and “simply failed to respond to his client and, later the Law Society about the matter”.  Mr Bellamy apologised for the conduct and accepted that suspension was appropriate.  

In assessing the conduct, the Tribunal considered that the information request was reasonably necessary for the Committee to do its job. It found that Mr Bellamy’s failure to respond frustrated the Committee from carrying out its function and created unnecessary trouble and expense to the profession.  It considered that the conduct was “sustained misconduct”, and Mr Bellamy had been “selfish and thoughtless”. His conduct was aggravated by his failure to respond to his former client, who he had kept “in the dark” for seven years about the matter.  

In terms of penalty, the Tribunal suspended Mr Bellamy for a period of four months.  It noted that he had no previous disciplinary history after decades in practice but considered that he lacked “the resilience necessary to practise safely without close oversight and guidance”. Mr Bellamy himself accepted that he felt “burned out”. The Tribunal made orders prohibiting Mr Bellamy from practising on his own account until authorised by the Tribunal. Mr Bellamy was also ordered to pay costs.