Sir, – The report of the response of Ken Murphy, director general of the Law Society, to the observations by Edmund Honohan, Master of the High Court when he opined that there are recurring episodes of solicitors engaged in wholly avoidable time consuming and cost-incurring court related procedures is baffling (Home News, November 21st).
Why did this self-governing body not ask the Master for details of the matters he referred to and promise to fully investigate these rather than reacting like an unrequited lover? Findings of misconduct against solicitors by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal soared to 213 in the three years between 2008 and 2010 compared to 92 in the preceding three years. Some 106 episodes of misconduct were referred by the tribunal to the High Court in the most recent three-year period compared to 20 in the preceding three years.
It has also been reported that claims in the region of €250 million have been lodged with the Solicitors Mutual Defence Fund whose resources have had to be augmented to cater for these.
The reputation of the solicitors profession rests with solicitors and their self-governing body, not with the Master of the High Court or any other third party. If there is a failure to attend to this, what recourse has public trust got other than to wobble when presented with credible insights which are not responded to decisively and effectively by the appropriate authority?– Yours, etc,