Scottish Legal Disciplinary Tribunal

The Scottish Solicitors` Discipline Tribunal (SSDT) is a specialist court in Scotland with jurisdiction over serious disciplinary matters within the legal profession in Scotland. The Scottish Solicitors` Discipline Tribunal (SSDT) is an independent body that deals primarily with serious disciplinary matters that arise from time to time within the Scottish legal profession. Our goal is to maintain the standards of the legal profession and public confidence in us. The website shows how we achieve this goal. The court reprimanded the defendant and fined him £10,000. The current lawyers who are members of the Tribunal are:[6] The Tribunal operates according to a number of rules which must be approved by the Lord President of the Court of Session. [2] Since May 2018, the Tribunal has operated under the Scottish Solicitors` Discipline Tribunal Rules 2008, which came into force on 1 October 2008. [5] With respect to complaints of professional misconduct, the Tribunal may: The Council of the Law Society of Scotland has lodged a complaint against Sverre Nils Aaen, formerly Aaen Peach Ltd, 81 St Vincent Street, Glasgow. The court was not satisfied that all the facts contained in the complaint concerning an allegedly misleading fee offer for a transfer transaction had been proven beyond doubt. After establishing the established facts, it concluded that they did not constitute professional misconduct.

The court found the accused not guilty. However, he acknowledged that the standard of proof for allegations of unsatisfactory professional conduct is the weighing of probabilities. In these circumstances, the court found that the defendant could be guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct and referred the claim back to the company under section 53ZA of the Lawyers (Scotland) Act 1980. The court ordered that the name of the accused be removed from the list of lawyers in Scotland. On 6 September 2022, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and its management company, Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal Administration Ltd, signed a new 3-year letter of intent with the Legal Services Board and the Law Society. The defendant overcharged a number of customers a total of more than £200,000. As a result of the surcharge, the respondent created a deficit on behalf of the client. He failed to issue fee notes to seven clients.

He authorized and signed inaccurate account certificates. His behavior was dishonest. The principles of honesty and integrity are fundamental to the profession. Members of the profession are in a very privileged position, and the public must be able to trust that lawyers are discharging their duties and obligations in an honest and trustworthy manner. Dishonesty with clients` money is one of the most serious issues concerning the court. Lawyers belong to a profession that demands high ethical standards. The public must be able to trust that lawyers are trustworthy and honest and that their integrity is beyond doubt. Lawyers must comply with accounting rules.

You have to pay fees to customers. Failure to do so will reduce public confidence in the profession. Account certificates are one of the ways in which the Company monitors compliance with the rules and risk to client funds. The Company is entitled to rely on certificates of accounts, which show the facts established and the measures taken to deal with them. The Council of the Law Society of Scotland has lodged a complaint against William Criggie, 137 (2nd Floor) Sauchiehall Street, Glasgow. The Court found the respondent guilty of professional misconduct and cumulo for breaching (a) rules B6.7.1 and B6.7.2, (b) rule B6.20.1, (c) rule B1.7.1, (d) rules B6.23.1 and B6.23.2; (e) Rule B6.11, (f) Rule B6.18.7, (g) Rule B6.7.3, (h) Rule B6.5.1, (i) Rule B6.18.7 and (j) Rules B1.9.1 and B1.9.2, all the Law Society of Scotland Rules of Practice 2011. The Council of the Law Society of Scotland has brought legal action against William Murnin, Solicitor, Greenock. The court found the defendant guilty of professional misconduct for (1) knowingly issuing bills and withdrawing funds from client books that were unjustified and excessive, and unreasonably overcharging clients to a total amount of more than £200,000; (2) caused a deficit in the customer`s account up to an amount exceeding £200,000; (3) has not issued bills of fees; and (4) up to and including 30.

April 2010. Complaints of more serious conduct will be pursued by the Society before the Scottish Solicitors` Discipline Tribunal. The disciplinary tribunal is an independent body empowered to decide whether the conduct of a lawyer constitutes professional misconduct. The disciplinary tribunal publishes its findings on its own website. The CCLM welcomes the opportunity to respond to the 2019 consultation on the rules of the Scottish Solicitors` Discipline Tribunal (SSDT). We have only responded to areas where we have specific comments to make. Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and its management company, Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal Administration Ltd, are completely independent of the Solicitors Regulation Authority. With respect to an appeal under section 42ZA, the court may: Please note that hearings may change in one day. The daily list of causes is updated in this case. Please review the updated daily list of cases prior to the day of the hearing. It is important that lawyers act honestly and with integrity. The respondent`s conduct in appearing twice before the court without a probationary certificate was dishonest.

He misled other regimented people and the court. The judicial system operates on trust in representatives. The appearance without a probationary certificate was a flagrant breach of trust and misled the court. On one of the occasions he appeared, the defendant conducted summary conviction, a matter that must have been of considerable importance to his client, who trusted him. Customers were put at risk. They were not covered by E&O insurance or the main policy. The respondent exacerbated these omissions by failing to cooperate with its regulator in its investigation. This conduct constitutes a serious and reprehensible deviation from the standards of competent and reputable lawyers and therefore constitutes professional misconduct.

The Council of the Law Society of Scotland has taken legal action against Paul Anthony Garrett. The court found the defendant guilty of professional misconduct because he appeared before the Paisley and Hamilton Sheriffs and posed as a lawyer, even though he knew he did not have a training certificate and was therefore not qualified, contrary to Rules of Practice B1.2, B1.13.1 and B1.14.1 and did not communicate with his professional association in violation of Rule B1.2.