Appointment of accountants in solicitor investigation was in accordance with law

Court of Appeal – solicitors - inquiry into the conduct of the appellant on the grounds of alleged misconduct – preliminary objection that the investigating accountants were not properly authorised, that their investigation was unlawful and that the evidence arising from the investigation was inadmissible before the Tribunal - Tribunal ruled that the investigating accountants were properly authorised and that their investigation was not unlawful and that the evidence arising from the investigation was admissible - solicitor sought judicial review of the inquiry – judicial review refused – memoranda issued to accountants – incorrect statutory provision cited - investigating accountants prepared a report - inquiry into the conduct of the appellant on the grounds of alleged misconduct - preliminary objection to the validity of the appointment of the investigating accountants – not on notice – written submissions directed - Tribunal held that the investigating accountants were validly authorised to investigate the appellant’s accounts and were authorised persons – decision of the High Court – grounds of appeal - appellant raised the issue of the validity of the appointment of the investigating accountants by way of preliminary objection and the Tribunal was bound, in my opinion, to rule upon the issue once it had been raised by the appellant - appellant cannot now be heard to complain that in ruling on his objection it exceeded its jurisdiction - authorisation of the investigating accountants - sole requirement is that they be authorised in writing for the purpose of exercising any of the Society’s functions - memorandum clearly appoints the investigating accountant to carry out a function of the Society - appellant singularly failed to address the second paragraph of the memorandum in any of his submissions and never explained why he contended it was not sufficient to comply with the statutory requirement – correct to conclude that read as a whole complies with the statute and that the investigating accountants were validly appointed as authorised persons within the meaning of the Regulations and the Solicitors Acts - valid authorisation - error on the face of the record - admissibility of the evidence of the investigating accountants - Tribunal was entitled to admit their evidence, and in particular their report, in the disciplinary proceedings - a comparatively serious case of intentional illegality has to be established to exclude evidence – fair procedures – draft ruling - not necessary for the Tribunal to consider in detail the appellant’s submissions that the investigating accountants were not validly appointed based on cases where warrants were held to be invalid for an error on the face of the record, as this would not alter their decision that the evidence was admissible - arguments advanced which formed no part of the case – within Court’s discretion to award costs to the respondent – appeal dismissed