Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Failure to inform court that complaint against solicitor was closed might be considered misconduct
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court allows (in part) an appeal from the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, and sets aside a determination that some of the complaints against a number of solicitors had disclosed no prima facie case of misconduct, on the grounds that the failure of a solicitor to inform the court in other proceedings that a complaint against a solicitor had been closed might be considered evidence of misconduct that required a hearing.
Applicant lodged eleven complaints in total alleging misconduct against four solicitors - perjury - dishonesty - Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal rejected all complaints as disclosing no prima facie evidence of misconduct - applicant appealed to the High Court - question of whether the SDT fell into error in holding that there was no prima facie evidence of misconduct, perjury or dishonesty - High Court, regarding several appeals, was not satisfied that the SDT fell into error - regarding appeal number 2010/78 SA in particular, High Court was satisfied that the failure to inform the Court of the closure of the complaint by the Society was a failure to promote the cause of justice in the context of a complaint which had been brought to the attention by the Solicitor in question - therefore satisfied that a prima facie case of misconduct had been established in respect of three allegations - appeals allowed in those circumstances - appeals dismissed in part overall
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
