Anthony Nowogrodzki

Introduction

Anthony Nowogrodzki is a former Crown Prosecution Service prosecutor who was struck off the roll of solicitors by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) after being convicted of child cruelty and assault. Admitted to the roll in July 1991, he had spent more than three decades in the profession before his 2024 convictions at Bristol Crown Court brought his career to an end. He was sentenced to 14 months’ imprisonment, and after he self-reported to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), the regulator’s investigation led to tribunal proceedings that concluded with the ultimate sanction. The three-person panel found the allegations proved, found that he had breached two SRA Principles, and described his misconduct as sitting “at the highest level, justifying only strike off in terms of sanctions”.

Background Information

Nowogrodzki was admitted to the roll of solicitors in July 1991 and went on to work as a prosecutor for the Crown Prosecution Service, the body responsible for bringing criminal cases in England and Wales. By the time the case reached the SDT, however, he no longer held a practising certificate. His position, as relayed to the tribunal, was that he wished to be removed from the roll without having to go through the hearing — a stance the SRA’s representative summarised by saying ’the respondent says “no need to drag it out”’. Instead of attending, he sent what the panel described as a “short amount” of correspondence, arguing against the SRA’s costs and requesting to be taken off the roll and for the matter not to be pursued further.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Adjudicated. Nowogrodzki’s 2024 convictions at Bristol Crown Court — cruelty to a person under 16 and assault by beating — are matters of court record, entered on his admission of the offences; the account below rests on those convictions and the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal’s regulatory response. The child victim is not named.

According to the Law Gazette’s report of the tribunal, Nowogrodzki was convicted at Bristol Crown Court in 2024 of cruelty to a person under 16 and assault by beating. The former CPS prosecutor had initially denied the allegations to police, but admitted the offences on the day the victim attended court. That late change of plea was described by the trial judge as “coming as a surprise to both the court and the Crown”. Nowogrodzki was sentenced to 14 months’ imprisonment for the child cruelty offence and three months’ imprisonment for the assault offence, to run concurrently. As he had been remanded in custody, he was released following his sentence.

The SRA’s case was that Nowogrodzki had ill-treated a child under the age of 16 and assaulted a child by beating, and that in doing so he breached Principles 2 and 5. Joshua Hitchens, for the SRA, told the tribunal that the trial judge “appears to have taken the view the offending was entirely out of character”. He outlined how the case had come before the regulator: “The respondent self-reported to the SRA, that prompted an investigation by the SRA.” He said Nowogrodzki’s position was that he “does not currently have a practising certificate and wished to be removed from the roll of solicitors without having to go through this process”.

Hitchens argued that the misconduct was “serious” and that it would undermine confidence in the profession, particularly when an individual “prosecuting others commits a very serious offence himself that in my submission plainly undermines trust and confidence of the public in the profession”. The tribunal found the allegations proved and that both principles had been breached.

Public Reaction and Consequences

Nowogrodzki did not attend the tribunal hearing and was not represented. The three-person panel retired to consider whether the hearing ought to proceed in his absence, and decided that it should, as it “seems to us the respondent is aware of proceedings”. Chair Richard Nicholas added: “On the evidence, he has voluntarily absented himself.” The panel therefore determined the case without him.

The sanction was the most severe available. In striking him off, Nicholas said the panel “considers the misconduct in this case at the highest level, justifying only strike off in terms of sanctions”. No costs order was made: the chair said the SRA’s costs of £8,631 were reasonable, but that there was “no realistic prospect of this being paid”. The outcome placed the case among the SRA and SDT interventions in which a criminal conviction for a serious offence against a child ends a legal career outright.

Current Status

Nowogrodzki is struck off the roll of solicitors and was released from custody following his sentencing, his remand time having counted toward the 14-month term. At the time of the tribunal he held no practising certificate and had himself asked to be removed from the roll, though without the disciplinary process he was nonetheless put through. The tribunal’s finding that he had “voluntarily absented himself” meant the decision was made in a hearing he chose not to defend. No appeal against the strike-off was reported.

Impact on Their Career/Life

The strike-off permanently removed Nowogrodzki from the profession he joined in 1991, ending any ability to practise as a solicitor in England and Wales. For a former prosecutor, the SRA’s case framed the loss of public trust in pointed terms: the profession’s credibility depends on those who bring criminal cases not committing serious offences themselves. The panel’s conclusion that the misconduct was “at the highest level” left no sanction short of removal on the table, and its decision to waive the SRA’s £8,631 costs — reasonable but with “no realistic prospect of this being paid” — closed the case without further financial proceedings. The case stands as an example of the SDT treating a criminal conviction for child cruelty as conclusive grounds for strike-off, even where the respondent self-reported, sought removal by consent, and took no part in the hearing.