The Code of Conduct applies to all legal practitioners (lawyers and lawyers) and all candidates for the positions of lawyer and legal person as defined in the Code and enters into force from the date of its publication in the Official Journal. 11.2. Second, if the Court is satisfied that the unlawful conduct has been established, a valid judgment is necessary to decide whether the person concerned is not fit and fit to practise as a lawyer. [8] In other words, the court should weigh the conduct complained of against that expected of a lawyer. 12. The law requires that the uberrima fides lawyer act in the greatest possible good faith in his relations with his client, which means that his observations and representations to the client must be correct, honest and open at all times. On November 17, 2020, the case was heard. The defendant was not present in court at the time of the oral proceedings. The appellant obtained a judgment prohibiting the respondent from practising as a lawyer for one year.
The respondent is now seeking an explanation of the decision. On 13 August 1998, the defendant was admitted and registered as a lawyer at that court of honour. Since 1 January 2004, he has been practising as an individual practitioner. The plaintiff alleges that the respondent did not file unqualified examination reports for the periods up to February 28, 2016 and February 28, 2017, contrary to the former plaintiff rules Rule 70.3 and 70.4. In addition, no Fidelity Fund certificate was issued to the respondent for the years from January 2017 to January 2018. Accordingly, the respondent was not entitled to practise for remuneration and therefore contravened subsections 41(1) and 41(2) of the Lawyers Act. (Act No. 53 of 1979). The respondent requests that the applicant`s late affidavit be dismissed and that the action be dismissed solely on the basis of this fact.
This request was denied because the affidavit did not raise any new issues and there was an acceptable and reasonable justification for the late filing. More importantly, if the affidavit is admitted, the respondent cannot prove that it is disadvantaged. Accordingly, the point in limine was rejected. 24. In light of all of what has been submitted to us, it is clear that the respondent does not want to take responsibility for his misconduct and apparently blames everyone but himself. It continues to demonstrate an untenable attitude towards the legal framework and has repeatedly expressed contempt for the applicant`s institution. 5.9 subject to the approval of the Chair of the Audit Committee of the Legal Practitioners` Fidelity Fund, appoint candidates or representatives and/or consult with and/or use the services of parents of lawyers, legal advisors, accountants and/or other persons as necessary to assist the President in the performance of his or her duties as trustee; and 9. Whether a lawyer is an appropriate person does not depend on factual findings, but is left to the discretion of the court. [7] 2. The respondent shall forthwith issue his certificate of admission to the bar of this honourable court and remit it to the clerk of this honourable court.
2. The case was dismissed on 17. November 2020. The respondent was not in court at the hearing. The judgment found in favour of the appellant and imposed a sentence suspending the respondent from the practice of counsel for a period of one year. 14. The lawyer must therefore always put the interests of his clients before his own and show the utmost good faith in his relations with his clients. 28. In view of the gravity of the infringements and the large number of those infringements, I therefore consider that the defendant is not fit and able to continue practising as a lawyer.
