Skip to content
Suche

Appeal Panel Hearings

30 NOV 2012

Mr Sackeer Hameem - 28 November 2012

Mr Sackeer Hameem
Appeal Panel hearing - 28 November 2012

Chair

Barry Picken

Members  

Catherine Audcent (Lay)
Andrew Crawford

Legal Assessor 

Mark McConochie
 
RICS Representative

Daniel Gutteridge

Panel’s Decision

  1. This is an appeal brought under Rule 59 of the Disciplinary, Registration and Appeal Panel Rules (“the Rules”) against the decision of the Registration Panel on 4 July 2012 (“the Decision”) to refuse Mr Hameem’s application for re-admission following disciplinary expulsion on 1 December 2010.
  2. Mr Hameem attended the hearing by telephone and was assisted by an interpreter who also attended by telephone.
  3. The Panel notes that the burden rests on Mr Hameem to satisfy it that the Decision was wrong.  It is only where the Panel consider that the Decision was wrong, that it may allow the appeal.
  4. In reviewing the Decision the Panel is required to have regard to the matters set out in Rule 64 of the Rules including the evidence presented to the Registration Panel on 4 July 2012, any representations made to that Panel if available in written form, including any transcript of the hearing, the appellant’s grounds of appeal and any representations made on behalf of the appellant and the RICS today.
  5. The Panel has carefully read the transcript of the Decision and the grounds upon which the Panel decided not to allow Mr Hameem’s application for readmission to membership on 4 July 2012.    The Panel has also carefully considered the evidence contained in the bundle of documents considered by the Registration Panel in reaching the Decision.  The Panel also takes into account the representations made by Mr Hameem today and his application for appeal dated 30 July 2012 with supporting documentation, some of which was not before the Registration Panel.  The Panel has also listened carefully to representations made on behalf of the RICS by Mr Gutteridge today.
  6. The Panel notes that it is not clear from Mr Hameem’s Grounds of Appeal the precise grounds upon which he says that the Decision was wrong.  During the course of his representations today, Mr Hameem conceded that he considered the Decision to be right but that he was seeking a last chance review on compassionate grounds.   
  7. Despite Mr Hameem’s concession, the Panel have considered whether he has satisfied the Panel, in what he has said today, and the evidence he has submitted, that there are in fact any grounds upon which it could find the Decision to be wrong.   The Panel finds as follows:

(i)  The Panel is satisfied that the Registration Panel did not make an error of law or an error of procedure in reaching its Decision;

(ii)  The Panel has also considered whether the Registration Panel was wrong in not exercising its discretion to allow Mr Hameem’s application for re-admission on 4 July.  The Panel is mindful of the purpose of today’s hearing which is for it to review the Decision.  That is not to say that the Panel should not engage with the merits of the Decision and in reaching its decision today, the Panel noted the reasons given by the Registration Panel on 4 July for refusing re-admission, including the timing of Mr Hameem’s application for re-admission in light of the gravity of the disciplinary findings which led to Mr Hameem’s expulsion;

(iii)  The Panel also notes that the Registration Panel on 4 July, when considering whether or not Mr Hameem was a fit and proper person for re-admission to membership and whether or not his admission was in the best interests of RICS, found that Mr Hameem had failed to satisfy them that he was a fit and proper person for re-admission to membership and that he had not presented sufficient independent evidence to them to support his assertions that he had undertaken courses and gained an understanding of RICS ethics.  In refusing Mr Hameem’s application, the Registration Panel was also not satisfied that Mr Hameem had taken sufficient steps to address the issues for which he was expelled.  The Registration Panel did not however have the benefit of the additional evidence presented to this Panel today pursuant to Mr Hameem’s appeal application found at page 8 of the bundle;

(iv)  The Panel finds, without seeking to criticise the Registration Panel, that in light of the additional evidence before it today, which the Registration Panel did not have the benefit of seeing, and in particular taking into account the passage of time since the events on or about 10 June 2009 which led to Mr Hameem’s expulsion, that there are sufficient grounds to find that the Decision was wrong;

(v)  For this reason, the Panel allows Mr Hameem’s appeal and has decided to refer the matter back to a Registration Panel for a new hearing in accordance with Rule 69(d). 

Determination on Publication

Publication

The Panel orders publication in accordance with the provisions of Supplement 3 to the Sanctions Policy dated 1 January 2008.