Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court, in a case of admitted misconduct and dishonesty by a solicitor who took monies from one client and used monies from another to reimburse the former, refuses to strike off the solicitor from the role of practicing solicitors, but makes an order suspending the solicitor from practice for a period of twelve months, and following that suspension makes an order imposing the following conditions: (a) that the solicitor will not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership; (b) the solicitor will be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years’ standing to be approved in advance by the Society; and (c) the solicitor will not be permitted to have access to client funds, on the grounds, inter alia, that these sanctions and orders fully take into account the required legal principles and are proportionate in all the circumstances, particularly given the solicitors very difficult personal and family circumstances.
Solicitors disciplinary tribunal - admitted misconduct and dishonesty by the solicitor - law society seeking for the court to impose the sanction recommended by the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal - tribunal recommended that solicitor not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership - that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor - under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years’ standing - to be approved in advance by the Society - and that he not be permitted to have access to client funds - solicitor wrongly withheld clients monies - solicitor apologetic for what occurred - solicitor had significant arrears on his mortgage - was sole earner in his family - solicitors wife had been diagnosed with a life limiting serious neurodegenerative disease - one of his sons has cerebral palsy and has increased care needs - report prepared by authorised person - solicitor attended regulatory committee - provided a full explanation and was extremely remorseful - court not bound by tribunal recommendations or societies decision - court followed principles contained in D'Alton case - court further cited Carroll v Law Society - court finds that striking off solicitor would not be proportionate - particularly in light of the difficult personal and family circumstances - the wife's neurodegenerative condition - sons cerebral palsy - fact he is sole earner - fact solicitor was and remains genuinely ashamed, remorseful and deeply apologetic for his actions - conduct out of character - full cooperation - solicitor took responsibility - solicitor reimbursed clients and senior counsel - attendance at all meetings - testimonials - however court ultimately still suspended solicitor for 12 months - further limited from practising as sole trader/ partnership - has to practice as assistant solicitor and under control of solicitor 10 years standing - cannot have access to client funds.
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.
The only e-mail alert service for all Irish judgments over the past 13 years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now