Naomi Rovnick
Hundreds of corrupt solicitors could escape having their practices shut down by the Law Society by claiming it infringes their human rights
A judgment handed down last week said that, by closing a solicitor’s practice, the society could be breaching the Human Rights Act. When a solicitor is suspected of dishonesty, the society usually stops them from practising. It has now been thrown into confusion over how to force the 100 practices it intervenes in every year to cease trading.
On 25 July, solicitor David Holder won the right to appeal against the Law Society’s decision last year to close his practice. When the society started investigating him in June 2001, there was at least £200,950 missing from his client account.
In allowing the appeal, Mr Justice Peter Smith said that forcefully closing a solicitor’s practice could infringe an individual’s right to enjoy personal possessions, outlined in the 1998 Human Rights Act. A solicitor’s practice, containing a book of business, files, documents and office equipment, is legally a personal possession.
The Law Society takes on an average of 100 interventions a year, it said in Holder’s appeal. Jack Rabinowicz of Teacher Stern Selby, who acted for Holder pro bono, questioned why the Law Society had not modernised its intervention methods since the Human Rights Act was published in 1998.
“You’d have thought the Law Society would have reviewed its powers under the Human Rights Act, but it doesn’t appear so,” he said.
Law Society chief executive Janet Paraskeva said: “We’ll consider the points raised in the judgment very carefully. It is the Law Society’s role to regulate effectively, and to deal efficiently, with alleged malpractice when discovered.”
Readers' comments (2)
norma ferrie | 11-Nov-2009 0:33 am
I am a victim of human rights abuses when the law society obsructs justice, by not diong fulfilling their obligations in persuing a complaint against a dishonest solicitors, I had several of my human rights violated in a sophisticated constructive fraud, that denied every protection I had under the law, My former solicitor and co conspiritors, Have so far not been held to account by the law society, so far all evidence of fraud has been ignored by the law society. it's time self regulation was abolished,
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 28-Nov-2009 1:23 am
It’s about time the law society rake out the corrupt and thieving solicitors, what about our rights, there is no respect for the law society and the so called regulations any more, us the public are fed up. It will be better solicitors are put under the FSA to regulate their financial dealings and the Law Society to deal with solicitors conducts only and even better, if after solicitors finish conveyances the monies/mortgage should be passed on from the mortgages/banks to the others direct, instead of passing on to the solicitors, as some of them have proved to be untrustworthy and if any balance of money due for Mr B, the said mortgage company should then transfer that to Mr B direct this will avoid those solicitors from corruptions etc.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment