432 / 462
GAZETTE
MWH
DECEMBER 1993
• Failing to respond to enquiries
raised by an executor.
• Failing to comply with
undertakings.
I • Failing to discharge the costs of his
agent.
| • Delaying in replying to the
correspondence of the Law Society.
I • Failing to furnish any adequate
explanation to the complainants or
to reply to correspondence.
• Failing to reply to the Law
|
Society's correspondence or to
|
furnish any explanation to the
Society.
• Failing to attend meetings of the
I
Registrar's Committee of the Law
Society.
The High Court
For the first time the number of
applications from members of the
public to the Disciplinary Committee
has surpassed those from the Law
Society. As can be seen from the table
: (on page 409) 21 applications were
made by members of the public
compared with five new applications
I from the Law Society. The increase in
the number of applications from the
| public would appear to indicate that it
I perceives and appreciates that the
Committee is wholly independent of
, the Law Society and is anxious to
promote and expects the highest
degree of honesty and integrity from
members of the profession.
I The Committee which is constituted
under the Solicitors Acts, 1954 and
1960, is composed of ten practising
solicitors. The Committee's function
is to hold an inquiry into the conduct
of a solicitor alleged to have
committed misconduct.
Misconduct is defined under Section 3
of the Solicitors Act, 1960 and
includes:
(a) The commission of treason or a
felony or a misdemeanour.
410
j
Petitions presented to the High Cou rt between the
j
1 Sep t embe r, 1992 and the 31 August 1993
9
Names of solicitors struck off the Roll of Solicitors
2
Censured, fined and costs
1
Censured and costs
2
Fined and costs
1
Adjourned
1
Awaiting presentation to the High Court
3
During the year under review eleven complaints against an individual solicitor
were referred to the President of the High Court by the Disciplinary Committee and
were presented by way of three Petitions to the High Court. The President made
Orders (3) in respect of ten of the said complaints striking the name of the solicitor
off the Roll of Solicitors. He also censured the solicitor in relation to the remaining
complaint.
Petitions a d j o u r n ed by the President of the
High Cou rt last year
10
Names of solicitors struck off Roll of Solicitors.
Costs awarded
2
Remitted to the Disciplinary Committee
1
Severely censured, fine and costs
1
Censured
1
Censured and costs
2
Respondent restrained from practising as a
solicitor other than in the whole time employment
and under the supervision of a solicitor who has
been in practice for at least ten years, - the
respondent undertook not to practise as a solicitor
without further leave of the High Court. Costs awarded.
1
Censured regarding his conduct as a solicitor and
ordered to cease to practice other than as an assistant
solicitor in the employment and under the supervision
of a solicitor of not less than ten years in practice. Costs
awarded.
1
Fines ranging from £500 to £3,000 were imposed in the appropriate cases.
(b) The commission outside the State
of a crime or an offence which
would be a felony or a misde-
meanour if committed in the State.
(c) The contravention of a provision
of the Solicitors Acts 1954/1960
or any Order or Regulation made
thereunder.
(d) Conduct tending to bring the
profession into disrepute.
While the Disciplinary Committee has
no power to impose any penalty or
sanction, the Committee may in its
report to the High Court include its
recommendation as to the fitness or
otherwise of the solicitor to be a