Rate-Your-Solicitor.com Forum

Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1994/en/ … index.html date accessed Monday 12th July 2010.

No. 27/1994:
SOLICITORS (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1994
Charges to clients.

68.—(1) On the taking of instructions to provide legal services to a client, or as soon as is practicable thereafter, a solicitor shall provide the client with particulars in writing of—

( a ) the actual charges, or

( b ) where the provision of particulars of the actual charges is not in the circumstances possible or practicable, an estimate (as near as may be) of the charges, or

( c ) where the provision of particulars of the actual charges or an estimate of such charges is not in the circumstances possible or practicable, the basis on which the charges are to be made,

by that solicitor or his firm for the provision of such legal services and, where those legal services involve contentious business, with particulars in writing of the circumstances in which the client may be required to pay costs to any other party or parties and the circumstances, if any, in which the client's liability to meet the charges which will be made by the solicitor of that client for those services will not be fully discharged by the amount, if any, of the costs recovered in the contentious business from any other party or parties (or any insurers of such party or parties).

(2) A solicitor shall not act for a client in connection with any contentious business (not being in connection with proceedings seeking only to recover a debt or liquidated demand) on the basis that all or any part of the charges to the client are to be calculated as a specified percentage or proportion of any damages or other moneys that may be or may become payable to the client, and any charges made in contravention of this subsection shall be unenforceable in any action taken against that client to recover such charges.

(3) A solicitor shall not deduct or appropriate any amount in respect of all or any part of his charges from the amount of any damages or other moneys that become payable to a client of that solicitor arising out of any contentious business carried out on behalf of that client by that solicitor.

(4) Subsection (3) of this section shall not operate to prevent a solicitor from agreeing with a client at any time that an amount on account of charges shall be paid to him out of any damages or other moneys that may be or may become payable to that client arising out of any contentious business carried out on behalf of that client by that solicitor or his firm.

(5) Any agreement under subsection (4) of this section shall not be enforceable against a client of a solicitor unless such agreement is in writing and includes an estimate (as near as may be) of what the solicitor reasonably believes might be recoverable from any other party or parties (or any insurers of such party or parties) in respect of that solicitor's charges in the event of that client recovering any damages or other moneys arising out of such contentious business.

(6) Notwithstanding any other legal provision to that effect a solicitor shall show on a bill of costs to be furnished to the client, as soon as practicable after the conclusion of any contentious business carried out by him on behalf of that client—

( a ) a summary of the legal services provided to the client in connection with such contentious business,

( b ) the total amount of damages or other moneys recovered by the client arising out of such contentious business, and

(c ) details of all or any part of the charges which have been recovered by that solicitor on behalf of that client from any other party or parties (or any insurers of such party or parties),

and that bill of costs shall show separately the amounts in respect of fees, outlays, disbursements and expenses incurred or arising in connection with the provision of such legal services.

(7) Nothing in this section shall prevent any person from exercising any existing right in law to require a solicitor to submit a bill of costs for taxation, whether on a party and party basis or on a solicitor and own client basis, or shall limit the rights of any person or the Society under section 9 of this Act.

(8) Where a solicitor has issued a bill of costs to a client in respect of the provision of legal services and the client disputes the amount (or any part thereof) of that bill of costs, the solicitor shall—

( a ) take all appropriate steps to resolve the matter by agreement with the client, and

( b ) inform the client in writing of—

(i)the client's right to require the solicitor to submit the bill of costs or any part thereof to a Taxing Master of the High Court for taxation on a solicitor and own client basis, and

(ii)the client's right to make a complaint to the Society under section 9 of this Act that he has been issued with a bill of costs that he claims to be excessive.

(9) In this section "charges" includes fees, outlays, disbursements and expenses.

(10) The provisions of this section shall apply notwithstanding the provisions of the Attorneys and Solicitors (Ireland) Act, 1849 and the Attorneys and Solicitors Act, 1870.

PS. This is the full details of Section 68 letter, hope this is of benefit to you. If you click on the weblink you can access the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994, which is the Statute Law and the Legal requirement for client protection of costs under Section 68 letter. The solicitor is guilty of misconduct if he has not issued you with a Section 68 letter.  Regards J.F.

Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal,  Contact Details.

Information and forms in relation to making an application to The Tribunal may be obtained by writing to the Tribunal Registrar at the following address:

The Friary,
Bow Street,
Smithfield,
Dublin 7,
Ireland.

Tel: 01 869 0766.
Fax: 01 869 0767.
Email: general@distrib.ie

Please note that all correspondence should contain the full name, address and telephone number of the applicant

Our office hours are 09:00-13:00 and 14:00-17:00 Monday to Friday.

About the Tribunal.

What is misconduct?
How is an application made?
What happens next?
What happens at an inquiry?
If an applicant is unhappy with the Tribunal's sanction imposed for misconduct?
What is misconduct?

“Misconduct” by a solicitor is defined broadly in the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2008 and is perhaps best illustrated by specific examples such as breach of undertaking, conflict of interest, misleading a client, failure to reply to communications from a client delay in bringing a case to court and dishonesty.

How is an application made?

A form of application [Form DT1] and a supporting affidavit [Form DT2) must be completed by the applicant setting out simply and clearly the details of the complaint of alleged misconduct against the solicitor concerned (“the respondent solicitor”). The affidavit should then be sworn before a commissioner for oaths or a practising solicitor.

Any documents considered appropriate to support the application should be referred to in the affidavit and included with it. The form of application and the supporting affidavit of the applicant (and any documents referred to in it) should then be delivered or sent to:

Tribunal Registrar,
Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal,
The Friary,
Bow Street,
Smithfield,
Dublin 7.

What happens next?
The Tribunal will, on receipt, send a copy of the application and supporting affidavit (and any documents referred to in it) to the respondent solicitor and to the Law Society of Ireland (“the Society”).

The respondent solicitor then has 28 days (excluding Saturdays and Sundays) to forward to the Tribunal an affidavit in response to the complaints made.

The Tribunal will send a copy of the respondent solicitor's response (if any) to the applicant, who may in turn file a further (second) affidavit responding to the matters raised by the respondent solicitor within 28 days (excluding Saturdays and Sundays)

If appropriate, the Tribunal (on application to a division of the Tribunal) may extend the time limit to allow either party to respond to the affidavit of the other party.

Save as set out immediately below in exceptional cases, the further (second) affidavit furnished by the applicant to the Tribunal shall be the final affidavit filed for the purpose of determining whether or not a ‘prima facie' case is made out against the solicitor.

In exceptional cases, the Tribunal may permit a further exchange of affidavits between the parties, initially on the part of the respondent solicitor and subsequently on the part of the applicant in reply. The Tribunal will fix the time allowed for the exchange of such further affidavits. Such exceptional cases are confined to circumstances where the overriding interests of justice require that such a further exchange of affidavits should occur.

If, after considering all documentation lodged by the parties, the Tribunal is of opinion that there is a ‘prima facie' case for an inquiry, the applicant, the respondent solicitor and the Society will be notified of the date, time and venue for the inquiry.

Where the Tribunal is of the opinion that there is no ‘prima facie' case for inquiry, the applicant, the respondent solicitor and the Society will each be notified in writing of its decision in respect of each complaint of misconduct and the reasons therefore. In such circumstances, the applicant may appeal to the High Court against the decision of the Tribunal within 21 days of the receipt by the applicant of notification of the Tribunal's decision. The Court may either confirm such decision of the Tribunal or, alternatively, may decide that there is a ‘prima facie' case for inquiry and require the Tribunal to proceed to hold an inquiry.

What happens at an inquiry?

The applicant should be present at the inquiry. However, if the applicant or his/her legal representative fail to attend, the Tribunal may proceed with the inquiry on proof that the applicant (or his/her solicitor) was served with the appropriate notice.

The applicant may be legally represented or may represent himself/herself, as he/she wishes.

In exceptional cases, the Tribunal can request the Society, if it thinks fit, to intervene by either lodging a further application on behalf of the applicant or proceeding on foot of the existing application.

Further, at any stage in the processing of an application for an inquiry, the Society (where it is not the applicant) may apply to a division of the Tribunal for leave either to make a new such application in relation to the respondent solicitor concerned or to undertake on behalf of the original applicant the prosecution of the existing application.

The Tribunal has the same rights and powers as the High Court in regard to the enforcement of the attendance of witnesses, the production and the discovery of documents.

Witnesses may be subpoenaed to attend and give evidence on oath or by declaration and be subject to cross-examination.

It should be noted that the Tribunal has power to order an applicant or a respondent solicitor to pay a sum or sums not exceeding a total of €10,000 to a witness or witnesses where the subpoenaed attendance of that witness or witnesses is found by the Tribunal to have been unnecessary and is likely to involve the witness or witnesses in unnecessary delay or expense.

Any such order by the Tribunal may be appealed by the effected party to the High Court within 21 days of the receipt by the effected party of notification in writing of the order.

At the end of the inquiry, the Tribunal will consider each complaint of misconduct against the respondent solicitor and make a separate finding in respect of each complaint. While it may find some of the complaints proven and others not, the Tribunal must in the case of each complaint give a reasonfor its finding.

Where the Tribunal finds that there has been no misconduct on the part of the respondent solicitor, the applicant and the respondent solicitor and the Society will be informed of its finding(s) and the reason therefore and that the Tribunal intends to take no further action in relation to the matter.

The applicant may, within 21 days of the receipt of notification in writing of the finding of no misconduct on the part of the respondent solicitor in respect of a complaint (whether or not there has been a finding of misconduct in relation to any other such complaint), appeal to the High Court against that finding.

Where the Tribunal finds that there has been misconduct on the part of the respondent solicitor in respect of a complaint or complaints it will then hear submissions by or on behalf of the applicant and by or on behalf of the respondent solicitor as to the appropriate sanction and as to costs. The Tribunal may by order do one or more of the following:

·advise and admonish or censure the respondent solicitor;

·direct payment of a sum, not exceeding €15,000, by the respondent solicitor to the Compensation Fund;

·direct payment of a sum, not exceeding €15,000, by the respondent solicitor as restitution or part-restitution to any aggrieved party, without prejudice to any legal right of such party; and direct that the whole or part of the costs of the Society or of any person appearing before it, as taxed by a Taxing Master of the High Court in default of agreement, be paid by the respondent solicitor.

The Tribunal may however, decide not to make such an order, but, instead, to report its finding(s) of misconduct to the President of the High Court with a recommendation as to the appropriate sanction, which may include the suspension of the respondent solicitor for a period or that he/she be struck off the Roll of Solicitors.

If an applicant is unhappy with the Tribunal's sanction imposed for misconduct?

If an applicant is unhappy with the Tribunal's decision in regard to the sanction imposed, the applicant may appeal to the High Court to rescind or vary the order of the Tribunal, in whole or in part, within 21 days, beginning on the date of the service of a copy of the order, or of the report of the Tribunal to the High Court, whichever date is the later.

The High Court may rescind or vary the order in whole or in part or may confirm that it was proper for the Tribunal to make the order.

The applicant may also appeal to the High Court within 21 days, beginning on the date of the service of the order, against the order of the Tribunal on the ground that the sanction imposed by the Tribunal is inadequate and that the Tribunal ought to have exercised its powers under the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2008 and to have referred the matter to the High Court; and, again, the High Court may rescind or vary the order in whole or in part or may confirm that it was proper for the Tribunal to make the order.

The Chairman's Report of The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal contains an analysis of applications and decisions of the Tribunal for each of the following years:

Chairman's Report 2008 Download.

Chairman's Report 2007 Download.

Chairman's Report 2006 Download.
Chairman's Report 2005 Download.
Chairman's Report 2004 Download.
Chairman's Report 2003 Download

To download each report, right click on the link and click on 'Save target as...'

This will save the reports to your desktop.
Alternatively, you can open a copy of the report directly in your browser by clicking on each link.

[Chairman's Report 2008

Section 68 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1960 (as amended)

In a case where the allegations of misconduct were factually admitted by the respondent and also admitted by him to be misconduct, the Tribunal found the respondent to have breached section 68(6) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 by failing to provide his client with a bill of costs as prescribed by the section;]

Dear Motto, I am a ‘Victim of the Legal Profession’ and member of ‘Victims of the Legal Profession Society’ (VLPS). I have now met hundreds of VLPS members from the jurisdictions of Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland.  The painful experience of VLPS members is that a ‘solicitor’  may promise to take a case against another solicitor, but will not actually do so and will ‘come-off-record’ and people are ‘re-victimised’ and ‘de-moralised’.

As you can see from reading the aims of the VLPS at www.crookedlawyers.com our motto is “You Can Never Improve On The Truth”.  On this basis, you should consider writing an affidavit and your witnesses and send this to The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.

The ‘Law Society’ is both the ‘Trade Union’ for the solicitors and so-called ‘Regulator to Protect the Public’ and from VLPS experience it is 100% ‘conflict of interest’ and biased completely in favour of the solicitors.

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, is also ‘heavily biased’ in favour of the solicitors, therefore, although you mention, ‘to get this sorted once and for all’. It is very important to have both ‘courage and persistence’  so that you can get justice for yourself and your family.

You will also be able to read below  brief details of ‘Our Corrupt Legal System’ and read the complete copy of ‘Serial Liars’ by Evan Whitton, an Australian Author.  If you read some of this material you will not be downhearted when you, perhaps find  ‘The Law Society’ ‘The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal’ and ‘The Judges’ behave as ‘World Champions’ at being ‘Unhelpful and Obstructive’ in your quest for justice. Regards Joe.

Our Corrupt Legal System: Why everyone is a victim except rich criminals. Evan Whitton. Foreword by Dr. Robert Moles.

https://www.bookpal.com.au/OtherLinks/S … fault.aspx date accessed Wednesday 5th May 2010.

About the Book:

The lawyer-run adversary system used in Britain and its former colonies, including the US, India, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia does not try to find the truth. It is the only system which conceals evidence.

'Our Corrupt Legal System' explains why trial lawyers, famously economical with the truth, control evidence; civil hearings take weeks, months or years; in serious criminal cases, 24 anti-truth devices allow more than 50% of guilty accused to escape justice.

By contrast, in the investigative system used in Europe and other countries, including Japan, trained judges control evidence and seek the truth; civil hearings take a few hours; 95% of guilty accused are convicted.

It is the most widespread, accurate and cost-effective system. Russell Fox, an Australian judge who researched the law for 11 years, concluded: ‘The public estimation must be correct, that justice marches with the truth.’

The vast majority of voters will support change to a truth seeking system: trial lawyers are fewer than 0.2% of the population; the public are 99.8%.

'A masterpiece.’ – Phillip Knightley, twice British Journalist of the Year.

ISBN 9781921681073 Author Evan Whitton Publisher Bookpal Size 5x8inches Price  $31.82 ($35.00 tax incl.)

PS. Thanks to Dr. Robert Moles in Australia for an email and the information about this new book by Evan Whitton.

http://www.lsa.net.au/pdf/Serial-Liars_Ebook.pdf date accessed Wednesday 14th July 2010.
How Lawyers Get The Money & Get The Criminals Off. By Evan Whitton.