A solicitor complained in the High Court yesterday that fair procedures had not been followed by the disciplinary tribunal of the Law Society of Ireland when investigating complaints made against him.
Mr Maurice O'Callaghan, of Lower Kilmacud Road, Stillorgan, Dublin, is seeking orders quashing a decision of the tribunal of June 6th, 1996, that he was guilty of misconduct and may not have the necessary fitness to be a member of the solicitors' profession. The application is opposed by the disciplinary tribunal.
Mr O'Callaghan's case came before the tribunal following a complaint by a client.
The Law Society submitted at the hearing that Mr O'Callaghan was guilty of conduct tending to bring the profession into dispute by reason of the manner in which he allegedly dealt with the use of funds received by him on behalf of the complainant as a result of a settlement of proceedings she had taken. On this complaint, the tribunal decided that Mr O'Callaghan was guilty of misconduct and that he may not have the necessary fitness to be a member of the profession.
Two of the tribunal members recommended that Mr O'Callaghan's name be struck off the roll of solicitors. A third recommended he be censured and fined £5,000, with the money to be divided between the society's compensation fund and the complainant. The tribunal also recommended that he pay costs of £500.
The tribunal also had before it another complaint alleging instances of deficiency in clients' funds; of improperly accrued credit balances in the office ledger; overcharging clients and failing to account to them for interest and use of bank accounts, other than client or office accounts, to conduct transactions on behalf of clients.
However, the tribunal decided to adjourn the hearing of this complaint until the status of the investigating accountant of the Law Society had been determined. It also reserved its position relating to the fairness of the inquiry procedure until this complaint came back before it again.
Mr O'Callaghan asked the High Court to quash and set aside Section 7 of the Solicitors Act, 1960, as amended, on the basis that it permitted the disciplinary tribunal to consider evidence and documents to be preferred against a solicitor/respondent in advance of an oral hearing of a complaint. He submitted that this provision deprived the solicitor/respondent from having any proper opportunity to challenge the admissibility or veracity of the evidence or documents.
Mr Justice McCracken said he would issue a reserved judgment in the case.