A Dublin solicitor facing an accusation that he aided a couple in an attempt to conceal €10,000 from the official administering their bankruptcy is to take judicial review proceedings, a disciplinary inquiry has been told.
No evidence was heard on Wednesday when the case of Anthony Joyce, of Anthony Joyce & Co Solicitors, Oliver Bond Street, The Liberties, Dublin 8, resumed before a three-member Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal.
Alan Doherty SC, for Mr Joyce, made a submission calling for the process to be stopped, saying his client and the couple had seen their good names “traduced” at the opening hearing in January.
At that hearing barrister Hugh McDowell, for the Legal Services Regulatory Authority, said Mr Joyce, who is a personal insolvency practitioner, attempted to “shelter” the €10,000 sum in his client account so that William and Mary Burke, of Portumna, Co Galway, got the benefit of it.
David McWilliams: ‘I’ve never seen anything like this economic chaos. Buckle up’
My grandfather died by suicide. I work in the same Irish university where he taught history
Government plans to quickly remove citizenship from convicted terrorist
Contraceptive concerns: ‘When I came off the pill, everything became so much better’
The Insolvency Service of Ireland (ISI) alleged this involved the commissioning of a criminal offence under the Bankruptcy Act and conduct likely to bring the solicitors’ profession into disrepute, he said.
Mr Joyce kept none of the €10,000, the inquiry was told by Denis Ryan, operations manager in the ISI’s bankruptcy division.
It is Mr Joyce’s case that the €10,000 constituted legal fees which he returned later out of sympathy for the couple.
When the hearing resumed on Wednesday, Mr McDowell said the authority wanted to amend the allegation against Mr Joyce, removing a reference to the commission of a felony or misdemeanour, but continue with an allegation of conduct likely to bring the profession into disrepute.
However, Mr Doherty said his client was still being accused of “aiding and abetting” the couple. William and Mary Burke, who were not represented before the hearing, were being accused of an indictable offence, he said.
Mr Doherty said he was not representing the Burkes but that they were entitled to be notified of what was happening, be given transcripts and be told they might want to seek legal advice.
He said his client and the Burkes should get an apology for what he described as a “constitutional car crash” and a breach of fair procedures.
Mr McDowell said the authority did not accept there had been a breach of fair procedures and the tribunal would not be making any finding about the Burkes. It was not unusual that a tribunal when hearing of alleged misconduct by a solicitor would do so in the context of alleged misconduct by the solicitor’s client, he said.
When the tribunal, after deliberating on the matter, decided to proceed with the inquiry, Mr Doherty said it was his client’s intention to seek a judicial review in the High Court and he asked that the hearing of evidence should not resume.
Most of the day having already been taken up with legal issues, the tribunal decided to adjourn the hearing to April 23rd next, where evidence will be taken unless the court orders otherwise or there is an agreement in that regard between the parties.
