Solicitor Nigel Weller spoke of his "great relief" after a judge ruled 44 charges of deception and fraud should be dropped.

The decision has ended six years of anxiety about his future.

Father-of-four Mr Weller, of Bowham Farm, Park Lane, Laughton, said: "I can't describe how I feel at the moment.

"It has been a long, long process and I am just glad it is over. It is hard to put into words. It's just a great relief."

Mr Weller's former assistant Teresa Blades burst into tears as she was cleared of two allegations of false accounting at Portsmouth Crown Court yesterday.

Ms Blades, 36, of Holland Street, Brighton, an assistant solicitor, worked with Mr Weller at the time.

Yesterday, Michael Forster, prosecuting, applied for a one-week adjournment before the trial started, to allow the defence counsel to look at fresh documents.

Mr Forster argued any trial would be unfair if the newly-received documents, prepared by the Legal Services Commission in relation to the charges, were not disclosed.

However, Judge Roger Jarvis refused the application insisting "enough was enough".

He said the investigation against Mr Weller and Ms Blades had "been progressing for a period of just short of six years".

Mr Forster requested the three-week trial should go ahead.

But the case was thrown out of court and the charges against both Mr Weller and Ms Blades were dropped after Paul Keleher, defending, argued that in going ahead with the trial without the extra documents the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had contradicted itself.

Mr Weller, 48, who has an office, Nigel Weller and Co, in Market Street, Lewes, had denied 43 counts of false accounting between 1994 and 1995 and pleaded not guilty to one charge of attempting to obtain money by deception at an earlier hearing.

CPS experts had estimated the total amount of money involved in the charges relating to Mr Weller ran to more than £77,000.

In ruling the case against Mr Weller and Ms Blades should be dropped, Judge Jarvis said: "The Crown has asked for an adjournment because of the time they have sought to consider documentation and I have refused that.

"The Crown now seeks to proceed.

"The defence say to proceed would be an abuse of process because the Crown has said it is now in a position to proceed.

"This goes against what they said an hour ago.

"In my judgement, it would be wrong for the case to proceed against these defendants.

"The consequences would mean the defendants would not be in the position of having the chance to consider, analyse and instruct counsel on issues arising from a large number of documents.

"In those circumstances the defendants would not get a fair trial.

"On that basis, I stay the prosecution against the defendants."

Ms Blades declined to comment after the hearing.