Ryan Sean Jack Williams

Introduction

Ryan Sean Jack Williams is an English solicitor, admitted to the roll in 2013, who worked as a litigation solicitor at London firm SBP Law and was described in reporting on his case as a former law firm partner. In July 2026, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) suspended him from practice for one year after finding that, during 2021, he used racist and antisemitic language toward colleagues at work social events and touched two junior female colleagues in acts the tribunal found to be sexually motivated. The tribunal ruled that public confidence in the profession demanded that he be penalised, but that his conduct did not require him to be struck off.

Background Information

Williams was admitted as a solicitor in 2013 and practised as a litigation solicitor with SBP Law, a firm based in London; the Law Gazette’s report on the case described him as a law firm partner. The misconduct occurred at various points during 2021 and centred on two work social events: an office party and the staff Christmas party held roughly two months later. Several former colleagues gave evidence about comments he had made and about how he had touched several of them in an unwanted and/or sexual manner at the Christmas party. One earlier allegation related to a private conversation with a colleague in which he was said to have referred to Jewish people having lots of money.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Adjudicated. Williams was a respondent before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, a regulatory body, and the tribunal found the allegations against him proved; these are regulatory findings, not criminal convictions. The panel’s findings included that two acts of touching — pinching one colleague’s bottom and slapping another woman’s inner thigh — were sexually motivated.

According to the tribunal’s findings as reported by the Law Gazette, Williams first referred to Jewish people having lots of money during a private conversation with a colleague. A few months later, at an office party, he repeatedly used a racial slur (described in the report as repeated use of the “n” word) and said to that same colleague, who is Jewish, that ‘racism to Jews doesn’t exist, antisemitism doesn’t exist, you’re all on top’. He was described as being “drunk, boisterous and louder than usual” during this party.

At the same event, Williams spoke about how two fellow workers should sleep together, telling one of them, “what are you waiting for, you just need to bend her over”. The tribunal further heard that at one point he went up close to a junior colleague and whispered, “you know you want me”.

At the Christmas party two months later, he told a colleague they had “only got your job because you are Jewish” and referred to another staff member’s “big Jew hands”. The tribunal heard that at the same event Williams got so drunk that he urinated on his clothes and could not get off the floor. He pinched one colleague’s bottom and slapped another woman’s inner thigh; the tribunal found both acts to be sexually motivated.

Williams denied making antisemitic comments and using racist words, questioning the accounts of complainants and saying he had been misheard or misinterpreted. He denied touching colleagues inappropriately, saying this must have been incidental contact in a crowded environment. The tribunal believed the complainants and found that the comments and the inappropriate touching had happened as reported.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The tribunal heard evidence that junior staff were affected upon returning to work following the Christmas party and were visibly distressed. Several former colleagues had given evidence against him, detailing the comments he made and the unwanted touching they experienced or witnessed.

In mitigation, Williams’ representative said the misconduct, whilst serious, was alleged to have occurred within a limited and defined period at social events, and did not involve clients, dishonesty, or sustained exploitation. He had no prior regulatory findings or complaints, the misconduct was said to be out of character, and medical evidence was submitted on his behalf.

The SDT concluded that public confidence in the profession demanded a penalty, and suspended Williams for one year, ruling that his conduct did not require him to be struck off. The tribunal agreed with Williams that he should undertake remedial treatment prior to any return to practice, and he must also pay costs, to be subject to detailed assessment.

Current Status

Williams is suspended from practising as a solicitor for one year under the SDT’s July 2026 ruling. Before he may return to practice, he is required to undertake remedial treatment. He also faces an order to pay costs, which will be subject to detailed assessment.

Impact on Their Career/Life

The suspension removed Williams from practice for twelve months and tied any return to the completion of remedial treatment, an unusual condition reflecting the tribunal’s assessment of his conduct. While the SDT stopped short of striking him off, a published finding that a solicitor made racist and antisemitic remarks to colleagues and touched junior staff in a sexually motivated way is a lasting reputational matter recorded in the profession’s regulatory history, alongside a costs order. The case also stands as an account of workplace conduct at a London firm in which junior employees gave evidence about being visibly distressed after events involving a senior colleague.

Sources

• Law Gazette, “Solicitor suspended for touching junior colleagues and racist remarks,” Jul 2, 2026 — visible source.