Removefiannafail

end corruption,stroke politics, & incompetent administration

A list of dodgy/lazy/incompetent/ downright crooked solicitors as compiled by the Law Society, courtesy of " The Story.ie"


Full name

Address

Date of Order

Details

Adam Suzin

Adam A Suzin & Company at 8 Annaly Court, Longford

30 March 2010

In the matter of Adam Suzin, a solicitor practising as Adam A Suzin & Company at 8 Annaly Court, Longford, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [10064/DT114/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Adam A Suzin (respondent solicitor) On 30 March 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor, in that he failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2008 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay the sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Aiden Barry

Roche House, 8 Bank Place, Limerick

25 January 2011

In the matter of Aiden Barry, of Aiden Barry, Solicitors, Roche House, 8 Bank Place, Limerick, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [7243/DT112/10] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Aiden Barry (respondent solicitor) On 25 January 2011, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 August 2009 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Aiden GM Barry

Roche House, 8 Bank Place, Limerick

26 April 2005

In the matter of Aiden GM Barry, a solicitor carrying on practice under the style and title of Aiden Barry, Roche House, 8 Bank Place, Limerick, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [7243/DT477/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Aiden GM Barry (respondent solicitor) On 26 April 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to file an accountant's report for the year ended 31 August 2003, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (statutory instrument number 421 of 2001), in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement




Ambrose Steen

Tara House, Trimgate Street, Navan, Co Meath

10 April 2003

In the matter of Ambrose Steen, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Ambrose Steen Solicitors at Tara House, Trimgate Street, Navan, Co Meath, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [2851/DT346] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ambrose Steen (respondent solicitor) On 10 April 2003, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Allowed a deficit of client funds to arise in his practice totalling ε£112,796 as of 11 December 2001, which deficit totalled ε£82,796 as of 21 January 2002, by drawing cheques in the client account payable to the office account thus creating the deficit b) Failed to file an accountant's report for the year ended 30 June 2001 in a timely manner or at all c) Failed to file a cessation report or a closing accountant's report in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund within three months from the date of the order c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland of this tribunal inquiry, to be taxed in default of agreement

Ambrose Steen

Tara House, Trimgate Street, Navan, Co Meath

6 March 2007

In the matter of Ambrose Steen, a solicitor previously practising under the style and title of Ambrose Steen Solicitors at Tara House, Trimgate Street, Navan, Co Meath, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [2851/DT67/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ambrose Steen (respondent solicitor) On 6 March 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to reply to the Society's correspondence in the investigation of a complaint in a timely manner or at all, and in particular to the Society's letters of 5 October 2005, 19 October 2005, 1 November 2005 and 9 November 2005; b) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee, made at its meeting on 30 November 2005, to make a payment of €250 contribution towards the costs of the investigation The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €250 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Ambrose Steen

Tara House, Trimgate Street, Navan, Co Meath

6 March 2007

In the matter of Ambrose Steen, a solicitor previously practising under the style and title of Ambrose Steen Solicitors at Tara House, Trimgate Street, Navan, Co Meath, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [2851/DT90/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ambrose Steen (respondent solicitor) On 6 March 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to deal with the administration of an estate in a timely manner, b) Failed to correspond with the complainants and/or to explain the reasons for the delay in the administration of the estate, c) Failed to properly distribute to the beneficiaries the estate in a timely manner, d) Failed to co-operate in the investigation of the complaint by the Society by persistently failing to deal with correspondence and failing to attend meetings and failing to provide any information The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Ambrose Steen

Tara House, Trimgate Street, Navan, Co Meath

10 April 2008

In the matter of Ambrose Steen, a locum solicitor who previously carried on practice at Tara House, Trimgate Street, Navan, Co Meath, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [2851/DT11/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ambrose Steen (respondent solicitor) On 10 April 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to discharge fees due to a named barrister in the sum of €5,36274 and in the sum of €9,20873, despite being requested to do so on numerous occasions, b) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence in the investigation of this complaint and, in particular, the Society's letters to the respondent solicitor dated 12 May 2006, 1 June 2006, 16 June 2006, 4 July 2006, 20 July 2006 and 3 November 2006, c) Failed to comply with the direction of the Society that the solicitor pay €550 towards the costs of the investigation, which direction was made at the meeting of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 20 September 2006, d) Failed to comply with the section 10 notice in relation to the production of the files and documents, pursuant to section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994, served on the respondent solicitor by registered letter dated 19 October 2006 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Ambrose Steen

Tara House, Trimgate Street, Navan, Co Meath

10 April 2008

In the matter of Ambrose Steen, a locum solicitor who previously carried on practice at Tara House, Trimgate Street, Navan, Co Meath, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [2851/DT44/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ambrose Steen (respondent solicitor) On 10 April 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to communicate with his client, the executor of the estate of a named deceased person, in a timely manner or at all, b) Failed to respond to the Society and, in particular, to the Society's letters dated 10 August 2006, 24 August 2006, 13 September 2006, 10 October 2006 and 13 October 2006, c) Deducted fees of €5,000 plus VAT from the estate without authority to do so, in circumstances where he was a co-executor in the estate, where there was no charging clause in the will and where the respondent solicitor witnessed the will, d) Deducted such fees without the consent or knowledge of the co-executor in the estate, e) Failed to comply with a section 10 notice served upon him on 13 September 2006 in a timely manner, having only produced his file to the Society following a High Court application, f) Failed to progress the administration of the estate in a timely manner, g) Failed to refund the balance of fees that he had deducted in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €3,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Ambrose Steen

Tara House, Trimgate Street, Navan, Co Meath

17 April 2008

In the matter of Ambrose Steen, a locum solicitor previously practising at Tara House, Trimgate Street, Navan, Co Meath, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [2851/DT74/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ambrose Steen (respondent solicitor) On 17 April 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to issue proceedings on behalf of a named client following a road traffic accident on 3 December 2001, despite being instructed to do so in a timely manner or at all, b) Failed to reply to the Society's correspondence in relation to the complaint, and in particular to the Society's letters of 13 September 2006, 25 September 2006, 4 October 2006, 4 January 2007 and 2 April 2007, c) Failed to comply with a notice served under section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994, and dated 2 April 2007, in a timely manner, d) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to the Society on 12 October 2006 and confirmed by him in a letter dated 31 October 2006, e) Informed the Law Society he was pursuing the claim by letter dated 14 February 2007 when this was not the case The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund

Ambrose Steen

162 Carraig Cluain, Tullamore, Co Offally

13 July 2009

In the matter of Ambrose Steen, a solicitor, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [2851/DT39/08 and 2009 no 13SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ambrose Steen (respondent solicitor) On 2 December 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Delayed in initially complying with the complainant's instructions to perfect the complainant's title to lands in Co Meath, b) Subsequently delayed in the handing over of documentation in relation to those lands to the complainant's new solicitors as requested, c) Failed to respond to correspondence from the Society, and in particular the Society's letters dated 17 July 2006, 2 August 2006, 14 August 2006, 21 September 2006, 4 January 2007, 15 January 2007, 19 February 2007, d) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee at its meeting on 20 September 2006 that he provide the complainant within the next 14 days all documentation required by her, e) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee at its meeting on 20 September 2006 that he pay €550 towards the cost of the investigation in the light of his failure to correspond with the Society, f) Failed to comply with a notice pursuant to section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 dated and served 2 April 2007 requiring delivery to the Society of all documents in relation to the complainant's complaint within ten days of the notice Having made the findings of misconduct, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal recommended that the matter be brought forward to the High Court On 13 July 2009, the President of the High Court made an order that: 1) The respondent solicitor should not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner, that he be permitted only to practise as a solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, 2) The Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

Andrew Walker

Hayes Solicitors, Lavery House, Earlsfort Terrace, Dublin 2

10 January 2008

In the matter of Andrew Walker, a solicitor formerly practising as a partner in Hayes Solicitors, Lavery House, Earlsfort Terrace, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3453/DT59/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Andrew Walker (respondent solicitor) On 10 January 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to disclose a material fact about the alteration of clinical notes prior to the commencement of a hearing in a named High Court case in a timely manner or at all, such material fact only being revealed to the court and to the plaintiffs as a result of queries raised by the presiding judge during the examination-in-chief of one of the defendants in the High Court case on 6 November 2003 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay 50% of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Anne Fitzgibbon

Fitzgibbon & Company, Solicitors, at The Penthouse, 121/122 Capel Street, Dublin 1

10 January 2009

In the matter of Anne Fitzgibbon, a solicitor carrying on practice under the style and title of Fitzgibbon & Company, Solicitors, at The Penthouse, 121/122 Capel Street, Dublin 1, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [5626/DT10/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Anne Fitzgibbon (respondent solicitor) On 1 October 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Failed to make contact with her named client on 29 July 2004 to advise her of a settlement proposal made by the state to settle her case, b) Refused an offer made by the state to settle proceedings brought by her named client on 29 July 2004 without getting her client's instructions, c) Put her own interests in securing her costs before the interests of her client by refusing to accept a settlement offered to her client on 29 July 2004, solely on the basis that her costs could not be fully paid The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Anthony M Murphy

Anthony M Murphy, Solicitor, 10 Old Quarry, Dalkey, Co Dublin

24 February 2005

In the matter of Anthony M Murphy, a solicitor practising as Anthony M Murphy, Solicitor, 10 Old Quarry, Dalkey, Co Dublin, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [4012/DT476/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Anthony M Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 24 February 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had failed to file his accountant's report for the year ended 30 June 2003, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (statutory instrument number 421 of 2001), in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland or any person appearing before them as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Anthony M Murphy

2 The Green, Straffan Wood, Straffan Road, Maynooth, Co Kildare, previously at 10 Old Quarry, Dalkey, Co Dublin

17 October 2006

In the matter of Anthony M Murphy, a solicitor practising as Anthony M Murphy, solicitor, 2 The Green, Straffan Wood, Straffan Road, Maynooth, Co Kildare, previously at 10 Old Quarry, Dalkey, Co Dublin, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4012/DT63/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Anthony M Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 17 October 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to file his accountant's report for the year ended 30 June 2004 in a timely manner or at all, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI number 421 of 2001); b) The solicitor, through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligations to comply with the regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of the clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland or any person appearing before them, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Anthony M Murphy

Anthony Murphy, Solicitors, 2 Straffan Green, Maynooth, Co Kildare

4 November 2010

In the matter of Anthony M Murphy, a solicitor practising as Anthony Murphy, Solicitors, at 2 Straffan Green, Maynooth, Co Kildare, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4012/DT66/10] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Anthony M Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 4 November 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 30 June 2009 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) in a timely manner or at all, b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligation to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public, c) Failed to deal with the correspondence of the Society in connection with his qualified report for the year ended 30 June 2008 and, in particular, the Society's letters of 16 March 2009, 26 June 2009, 3 November 2009 and 27 November 2009 in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €4,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Society as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Bernard O'Beirne

BJ O'Beirne & Co Solicitors, at Main Street, Arklow, Co Wicklow

26 May 2004

In the matter of Bernard O'Beirne, solicitor, practising as BJ O'Beirne and Co Solicitors, at Main Street, Arklow, Co Wicklow, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [3057/DT422] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Bernard O'Beirne (respondent solicitor) On 26 May 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Falsified his books of accounts b) Concealed the appropriation of fees in his books of account c) Did not raise VAT invoices in a number of cases d) Breached regulation 7(a)(iv) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (no 2) of 1984 in drawing solicitor and client fees from the client account without delivering to the client a bill of costs or other written intimation of the amount of the costs incurred e) The respondent solicitor breached regulation 5(2) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, 2001 by holding monies to which he was beneficially entitled in a client account for longer than three months f) The respondent solicitor breached regulation 8(2) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, 2001 in withdrawing monies from a client account other than by way of cheque drawn on the client account in favour of himself and other than by a transfer from the client to the office account g) The respondent solicitor breached regulation 8(3)(a) and (b) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, 2001 in that the payee details on certain cheques drawn on the client account were false h) The respondent solicitor breached regulation 12(1) and (2)(a) and (b) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, 2001 in failing to maintain proper books of account which showed the true financial position in relation to the respondent solicitor's transactions with clients' monies and, in respect of each client, failing to distinguish separately between clients' monies and other monies transacted by him i) The respondent solicitor breached regulation 12(4)(b) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, 2001 in that the records of transactions with clients' monies were recorded in fictitious clients' ledgers j) The respondent solicitor, in relation to transactions prior to 1 January 2002, breached regulation 8(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (no 2) of 1984 by failing to withdraw monies from the client account either by a cheque drawn on the client account in favour of himself or by the transfer from the client account to an account in the name of the respondent solicitor not being a client account k) The respondent solicitor, in relation to transactions prior to 1 January 2002, breached regulation 10(1) of Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (no 2) of 1984 by failing to maintain proper books of account to show all his dealings with client's money received, held or paid by him The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay the maximum sum permissible under section 7 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1960, as amended, being €15,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland to be taxed in default of agreement

Brendan McManus

35 Beaufield Manor, Stillorgan, Co Dublin

11 March 2004

In the matter of Brendan McManus, solicitor, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to theSolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [4089/DT400] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Brendan McManus (respondent solicitor) On 11 March 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that: a) Up to the date of swearing of the society's affidavit, sworn on 30 May 2003, he failed to hand over the title documentation relating to two properties owned by a former client in a timely manner or at all, despite being requested to do so b) He failed to communicate with the complainant in a timely manner or at all c) He failed to comply with an undertaking to the Registrar's Committee that he would revert to the society within two weeks, which undertaking was given to the Registrar's Committee meeting on 5 November 2002 e) He failed to reply to correspondence from the society and in particular the society's letters of 5 September 2002, 18 September 2002, 30 September 2002, 8 November 2002, 21 November 2002, 19 December 2002, 13 January 2003 and 21 February 2003 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €500 each in respect of charges (a), (b), (c) and (e) to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society (including witnesses' expenses) as taxed by the taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Brendan McManus

35 Beaufield Manor, Stillorgan, Co Dublin

22 November 2004

The High Court, 2004, no 142 SA In the matter of Brendan McManus, a solicitor previously carrying on practice at 35 Beaufield Manor, Stillorgan, Co Dublin, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [4089/DT440] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Brendan McManus (respondent solicitor) On 24 August 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Up to the date of swearing of the society's affidavit of 3 March 2004, failed to register his client's title in the Land Registry in a timely manner or at all b) Failed to communicate with his client in a timely manner or at all c) Failed to report that he had received a Land Registry query to the Law Society, as requested by the society in its letter dated 12 May 2003 d) Failed to comply with the section 10 notice served on the solicitor on 14 February 2003 to submit his file to the society within ten days e) Failed to respond to the society's correspondence, and in particular the society's letters of 14 February 2003, 13 June 2003, 20 August 2003, 28 August 2003 and 12 September 2003 The tribunal reported to the High Court and recommended that: a) The respondent solicitor may not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner and should be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of a solicitor of at least ten years' standing who shall be approved in advance by the appropriate committee of the Law Society of Ireland b) The respondent solicitor pay the costs of the Law Society of Ireland in relation to the hearing before the tribunal, to be taxed in default of agreement On 22 November 2004, the president of the High Court ordered: 1) That the respondent solicitor be prohibited from practising as a sole practitioner and that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of a solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the appropriate committee of the Law Society ̐ that the respondent be at liberty to apply after the expiration of a period of 12 months from the date of the order in the event of his being unable to remain in employment 2) That the respondent solicitor do pay to the applicant its costs of the proceedings before the disciplinary tribunal and also the costs of and incident to the application to the High Court and order to be taxed in default of agreement ̐ execution on foot of the said order for costs to be stayed for a period of six months from the date of the order

Brendan McManus

35 Beaufield Manor, Stillorgan, Co Dublin

11 March 2005

In the matter of Brendan McManus, a solicitor, of 35 Beaufield Manor, Stillorgan, Co Dublin, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 [4089/DT39/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Brendan McManus (respondent solicitor) On 3 November 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he is in breach of the provisions of the Professional Indemnity Insurance Regulations and in particular the provisions of SI 312 of 1995 as amended by SI no 362 of 1999, having failed to renew run-off cover for the year 2005 in accordance with the requirements of those regulations The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor do stand censured

Brian FG Toolan

Toolan & Associates, Arva, Co Cavan

25 July 2005

The High Court In the matter of Brian FG Toolan, a solicitor who practised as Toolan & Associates at Arva, Co Cavan, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [2005/48SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Brian FG Toolan (respondent solicitor) On 3 May 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Allowed the existence of a deficit of client funds as of 28 February 2003 of at least €126,31743 b) Failed to write up the client ledgers since 31 August 2001, in breach of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations c) Drew amounts from the client account to the office account in the period 1 July 2001 to 28 February 2003, which were not debited to specific clients in the clients ledger, amounting to €161,23143 d) Drew two amounts on the client account in February 2003, which were used to purchase two bank drafts, the proceeds of which, according to the Ulster Bank, were lodged to the solicitor's credit card account, totalling €21,050 e) Allowed debit balances on the client ledger account in the solicitor's own name, totalling €6,32765 f) Allowed other debit balances to occur in the client ledger account, totalling €5,83951 g) In 2001, sold a site and part of the proceeds, in the sum of €14,72330, were lodged to the client account and credited to the ledger account in the solicitor's own name Over a period of months, the solicitor then withdrew €14,72320 and continued to make withdrawals from the client account, which were referenced to the sale of the site, resulting in the debit balance occurring of €6,32765 h) Abandoned his practice without making necessary arrangements for the protection of his clients or the proper carrying on of his practice in February 2003 The matter came before the president of the High Court on 25 July 2005 and the president ordered on that date that the respondent solicitor may not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or as a partner in a solicitor's practice, but that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, and that the respondent solicitor pay the costs of the Law Society of Ireland in relation to the hearing before the disciplinary tribunal and the costs of the hearing before the High Court, such costs to be taxed in default of agreement

Brian Grogan

Brian Grogan & Company, Solicitors, at Main Street, Lucan, Co Dublin

8 April 2008

In the matter of Brian Grogan, a solicitor practising as Brian Grogan & Company, Solicitors, at Main Street, Lucan, Co Dublin, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3291/DT45/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Brian Grogan (respondent solicitor) On 8 April 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking dated 1 March 2005 to discharge both EBS mortgages (including arrears thereon) as of that date and to furnish the vacate/discharge release as soon as same came to hand in a timely manner, having only furnished same on 5 February 2007, b) Failed to comply with an undertaking dated 1 March 2005 to encash the joint PIP with EBS and to pay over one-half thereof to the complainants as soon as same was received in a timely manner, c) Failed to reply to the Society's correspondence in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Brian Grogan

Brian Grogan & Company, Solicitors, at Main Street, Lucan, Co Dublin

8 April 2008

In the matter of Brian Grogan, a solicitor practising as Brian Grogan & Company, Solicitors, at Main Street, Lucan, Co Dublin, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3291/DT99/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Brian Grogan (respondent solicitor) On 8 April 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to deal with the administration of the estate of a named deceased, who died on 15 September 2001, in a timely manner, b) Failed to deal with the sale of the house, which was a substantial asset in the estate of the named deceased, in a timely manner or at all, c) Failed to deal with taking up the monies due to the estate from An Post and the Ulster Bank in a timely manner or at all, d) Failed to deal with the payment of the funeral expenses in the estate of the named deceased in a timely manner or at all, e) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence, and in particular to the letters from the Society sent to the solicitor on 28 November 2004, 14 December 2004, 19 January 2005, 3 March 2005, 8 April 2005, 25 July 2005, 27 September 2005, 6 October 2005, 24 October 2005, 9 November 2005, 2 December 2005, 20 January 2006, 28 March 2006, 5 May 2006, 19 May 2006, f) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee, made on 20 September 2005, to lodge his own affidavit and the Land Registry receipt with the secretariat of the Society within two weeks, and also to write to the complainant with a copy to the secretariat advising her of the position within two weeks, g) Failed to comply with the direction of the committee, made on 18 January 2006, that the solicitor should follow up the application with the Land Registry and furnish an additional progress report prior to the main meeting with the Society, h) Failed to comply with the direction of the committee on 30 November 2005 that the solicitor furnish copies of the sworn affidavit together with the Land Registry receipt on or before 1 January 2006 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €10,000 as restitution to the aggrieved parties without prejudice to any legal right of such party, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Canice M Egan

Canice M Egan & Company, 9 Sarsfield Street, Clonmel, Co Tipperary

2 February 2006

In the matter of Canice M Egan, solicitor, practising as Canice M Egan & Company at 9 Sarsfield Street, Clonmel, Co Tipperary, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [10044/DT32/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Canice M Egan (respondent solicitor) On 2 February 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had breached regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (SI no 421 of 2001) in failing to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report covering his financial year ended 30 November 2003 within six months thereafter, that is, by 31 May 2004 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay a contribution of €500 towards the costs of the Law Society of Ireland

Canice M Egan

Canice M Egan & Company, 9 Sarsfield Street, Clonmel, Co Tipperary

17 April 2008

In the matter of Canice M Egan, a solicitor practising as Canice M Egan & Company at 9 Sarsfield Street, Clonmel, Co Tipperary, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [100484/DT58/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Canice M Egan (respondent solicitor) On 17 April 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had breached regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (SI no 421 of 2001) in failing to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report covering his financial year ended 30 November 2005 within six months thereafter, that is by 31 May 2006 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Cathal O'Donovan

O'Donovan Solicitors, 73 Capel Street, Dublin 1

12 April 2005

In the matter of Cathal O'Donovan, a solicitor carrying on practice as O'Donovan Solicitors, 73 Capel Street, Dublin 1, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [3936/DT447/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Cathal O'Donovan (respondent solicitor) On 12 April 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Set off funds from an original purchase transaction of a property and subsequent sales against the solicitor's own costs, without issuing bills or accounting properly to the client for those funds b) Failed to account for interest on the sum of ε£250,000, which he had held for a period of at least four months, until recommended to do so by the Registrar's Committee and then only paid over €2,222 in interest, which was not acceptable as the total amount due to the clients c) Delayed in the transfer of files The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund; that is, €3,000 in respect of charge (a), €1,000 in respect of charge (b) and €1,000 in respect of charge (c) c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland and the witnesses who appeared before the tribunal on 25 November 2004, 10 February 2005 and 12 April 2005 as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Christopher B Walsh

90 Park Drive Avenue, Castleknock, Dublin 15 and Main Street, Tinnahinch, Graignamanagh, Co Kilkenny

24 April 2003

In the matter of Christopher B Walsh, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Christopher B Walsh Solicitor at 90 Park Drive Avenue, Castleknock, Dublin 15, and who also has a branch office at Main Street, Tinnahinch, Graignamanagh, Co Kilkenny, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [4949/DT338] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Christopher B Walsh (respondent solicitor) On 24 April 2003, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to file his accountant's report for the year ended 28 February 2001 in a timely manner or at all in accordance with the provisions of section 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations of 1984 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay the sum of €1,250 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland or any person appearing before them as taxed by the taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Christopher B Walsh

90 Park Drive Avenue, Castleknock, Dublin 15 and Main Street, Tinnahinch, Graignamanagh, Co Kilkenny

1 October 2006

In the matter of Christopher B Walsh, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Christopher B Walsh Solicitor at 90 Park Drive Avenue, Castleknock, Dublin 15 and Main Street, Tinnahinch, Graiguenamanagh, Co Kilkenny, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4940/DT37/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Christopher B Walsh (respondent solicitor) On 10 January 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had failed to file his accountant's report for the year ended 28 February 2004 with the Society in a timely manner, having only filed same with the Society on 1 June 2005, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (statutory instrument no 421 of 2001) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Christopher Ryan

Chris Ryan, Solicitor, 18 North King Street, Dublin 7

25 March 2004

In the matter of Christopher Ryan, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Chris Ryan, Solicitor, at 18 North King Street, Dublin 7, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [4471/DT411] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Christopher Ryan (respondent solicitor) On 25 March 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: Failed to file his accountant's report for the year ended 30 April 2002 in a timely manner, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (statutory instrument no 421 of 2001), having only filed same with the society on 30 May 2003 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Is hereby advised b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Ciaran R Callan

Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14

22 November 2007

In the matter of Ciaran R Callan, a solicitor previously practising as Callan & Company Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4316/DT16/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ciaran R Callan (respondent solicitor) On 22 November 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 30 April 2006 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI 421 of 2001), in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Ciaran R Callan

Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14

13 July 2009

In the matter of Ciaran R Callan, a solicitor formerly practising as Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4316/DT07/08 and High Court record no 2009 no 72 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ciaran R Callan (respondent solicitor) On 25 June 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant in letter dated 11 January 2000, whereby he undertook to deal with all reasonable Land Registry queries in relation to a transaction involving a named property for a named client, b) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 12 September 2007, whereby he undertook to send a written report by 5 October 2007 to the Society regarding the current position as to his compliance with the undertaking given by him to the complainant, c) Misled the Society in a telephone conversation on 12 July 2007, informing the Society that the matter was resolved, when it was not, d) Misled the Society in a letter dated 19 July 2007, stating that the deed was re-executed, whereas it still required a second signature The tribunal recommended that: a) The respondent solicitor is not a fit and proper person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) The name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) The respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 13 July 2009, the President of the High Court ordered that: 1) The name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) The Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

Ciaran R Callan

Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14

13 July 2009

In the matter of Ciaran R Callan, a solicitor formerly practising as Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4316/DT09/08 and High Court record no 2009 no 73 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ciaran R Callan (respondent solicitor) On 25 June 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant contained in a letter dated 13 June 2002, whereby he undertook to furnish a certificate of title and title documents to a named property formerly belonging to a named client, deceased, to the complainant's client, a named financial institution, b) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 12 September 2007, whereby he undertook to send a written report by 5 October 2007 to the Society regarding the current position as to his compliance with the undertaking given to the complainant The tribunal directed that: a) The respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) The name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) The respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 13 July 2009, the President of the High Court ordered that: 1) The name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) The Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

Ciaran R Callan

Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14

13 July 2009

In the matter of Ciaran R Callan, a solicitor formerly practising as Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4316/DT10/08 and High Court record no 2009 no 74 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ciaran R Callan (respondent solicitor) On 25 June 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant contained in letter of 10 May 2002, whereby he undertook to furnish certificate of title together with the title deeds to a named financial institution in respect of a named property, b) Failed to provide an adequate response to the same named financial institution's letters to him dated 25 October 2005 and 2 December 2005 respectively, and to the complainant's letters dated 20 October 2006, 8 November 2006, 8 December 2006 and 7 February 2007 respectively, c) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 12 September 2007, whereby he undertook to send a written report to the Society by 3 October 2007 regarding the current position with regard to compliance with the undertakings previously given by him to the complainant, d) Failed to reply in a timely manner to the Society's correspondence, in particular to letters from the Society dated 21 March 2007, 1 May 2007, 23 May 2007 and 12 June 2007 The tribunal directed that: a) The respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) The name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) The respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 13 July 2009, the President of the High Court ordered that: 1) The name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) The Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

Ciaran R Callan

Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14

13 July 2009

In the matter of Ciaran R Callan, a solicitor formerly practising as Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4316/DT11/08 and High Court record no 2009 no 75 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ciaran R Callan (respondent solicitor) On 25 June 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant contained in a letter of 14 December 2005 whereby he undertook to furnish an amended scheme map and to deal with all Land Registry queries regarding the registration of named clients' title to a named property, b) Failed to provide an adequate response to the complainant's enquiries and, in particular, to the complainant's letters dated 18 April 2006, 1 February 2007, 15 February 2007, 26 March 2007 and 10 April 2007 respectively, c) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 12 September 2007, whereby he undertook to send a written report to the Society by 3 October 2007 regarding the current position with regard to compliance with the undertakings previously given by him to the complainant The tribunal directed: a) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) That the respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 13 July 2009, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) That the Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

Ciaran R Callan

Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14

13 July 2009

In the matter of Ciaran R Callan, a solicitor formerly practising as Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4316/DT12/08 and High Court record no 2009 no 76 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ciaran R Callan (respondent solicitor) On 25 June 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant contained in letter of 1 July 2004, whereby he undertook to furnish an original deed of assurance dated 4 March 1998 duly registered, b) Failed to honour an undertaking given in a letter dated 1 July 2004 to the complainant, whereby he undertook to extract a grant of probate to the estate of a named client, deceased, and upon issue of same, execute a deed of assignment of the leasehold interest in the premises to a named client, c) Failed to honour an undertaking given in a letter dated 1 July 2004 to the complainant, whereby he undertook to furnish a vesting certificate duly registered in the Registry of Deeds, d) Failed to honour an undertaking given in a letter dated 1 July 2004 to the complainant, whereby he undertook to furnish a certificate of clearance from capital acquisitions tax in the estate of a named client, e) Failed to honour an undertaking given in a letter dated 1 July 2004 to the complainant, whereby he undertook to discharge any outstanding waste charges if necessary, f) Misrepresented the position to the complainant from in or around July 2004 by stating all was in order in respect of the extraction of the grant of probate to the estate of a named client, when in fact it was not, g) Misrepresented to the Society in a series of letters dated 5 September 2006, 15 December 2006, 30 January 2007 and 14 March 2007 that the matter of the complaint was being resolved and that an application in respect of de bonis non grant in the estate was being made, when it is apparent that no progress has been made on this issue, h) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the Complaints and Client Relations Committee meeting on 12 September 2007, whereby he undertook to send a written report to the Society regarding the current position with regard to compliance with the undertakings previously given by him to the complainant by 3 October 2007, i) Failed to provide an adequate response to the Society's enquiries during this investigation and, in particular, failed to respond properly or at all to the Society's letters of 9 October 2006, 18 October 2006, 26 October 2006, 22 March 2007, 20 April 2007, 15 May 2007, 31 May 2007, 8 June 2007, 18 June 2007, 19 July 2007, 29 August 2007, 13 September 2007, 9 October 2007 and 23 October 2007 respectively The tribunal directed: a) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) That the respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 13 July 2009, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) That the Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

Ciaran R Callan

Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14

13 July 2009

In the matter of Ciaran R Callan, a solicitor formerly practising as Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4316/DT13/08 and High Court record no 2009 no 77 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ciaran R Callan (respondent solicitor) On 25 June 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant contained in a letter of 29 September 2000, whereby he undertook to furnish a certificate of compliance relating to a transaction between his named client and the complainant's named clients in respect of a named property, b) Failed to provide an adequate response to the complainant's enquiries and, in particular, to the complainant's letters dated 19 February 2001, 12 March 2001, 25 April 2001, 11 May 2001, 21 June 2001, 9 August 2001, 14 November 2001, 28 February 2002, 16 August 2002, 3 September 2002, 5 December 2002, 3 March 2005 and 16 August 2005 respectively, c) Persisted to misrepresent the position in relation to an undertaking by giving assurances to the complainant, which subsequently were not honoured, by letters dated 5 March 2002 and 21 August 2002, d) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 12 September 2007, whereby he undertook to send a written report to the Society by 3 October 2007 regarding the current position in relation to compliance with the undertakings previously given by him to the complainant, e) Failed to provide any adequate response to the Society's enquiries during this investigation and, in particular, failed to respond properly or at all to the Society's letters of 21 November 2005, 8 June 2006, 30 June 2006, 20 July 2006, 17 August 2006, 31 August 2006, 19 October 2006, 3 November 2006, 13 November 2006, 24 April 2007, 30 April 2007, 31 May 2007, 11 June 2007 respectively The tribunal directed: a) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) That the respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 13 July 2009, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) That the Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

Ciaran R Callan

Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14

13 July 2009

In the matter of Ciaran R Callan, a solicitor formerly practising as Callan & Company, Solicitors, River Bank House, Dodder Park Drive, Dublin 14, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4316/DT79/08 and High Court record no 2009 no 78 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ciaran R Callan (respondent solicitor) On 12 March 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Admitted an estimated deficit of €1,900,000 to exist on the client account as at 12 November 2007, b) Failed to keep proper books of accounts in compliance with regulation 12(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, c) Failed to kept such proper books of account, in compliance with regulation 12(2) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, that would show the true financial position in relation to each client and the monetary transactions of the client, d) Failed to keep the minimum books of accounts, in breach of regulation 20 of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, including failing to keep cash books showing all monies received and paid on behalf of each client, failing to keep proper office and client ledgers, failing to keep a proper record of all monies as lodged, failing to keep a record of all monies transferred between ledger accounts, failing to keep copies of each draft obtained in connection with any client matters, failing to keep copies of each bill of costs furnished to clients, e) Failed to keep the books of account written up to date in breach of the regulations, f) Transferred monies between the ledger accounts of different clients, in breach of regulation 9 of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, so as to conceal the underlying deficit he created in the client accounts, g) Caused a deficit to arise on client accounts by paying monies to clients where funds were not held for those clients, in breach of regulation 7(2)(b), and caused debit balances to arise, h) Failed to prepare balancing statements on client accounts within two months of the balancing date, in breach of regulation 12(7), i) Failed to prepare balancing statement on office account within two months of the end of the accounting year, j) Transferred monies for outlays not yet disbursed to office account, in breach of regulation 7(1)(a)(ii), k) Failed to maintain proper books of account and caused fundamental errors to arise on the books of accounts, thus discrediting the reliability of the accounting records as at 30 April 2006 and earlier dates due to errors found on ledger cards as detailed in appendix 1 to the interim investigation report dated 15 March 2007, l) Overstatement of client balances in Leixlip office of €288,000 and overstatement of client balances in Ennis office of €11,000, m) Failed to stamp and register deeds on certain client files, despite being put in funds to carry out stamping and registration of deeds The respondent solicitor failed to stamp and register deeds on the following files: i) File C/16/04 for the sum of €8,400, (ii) File M/13/05 stamp duty due €43,410, (iii) File B/11/05 stamp duty due €31,125, (iv) File P/4/05 stamp duty due €223,200, (v) File Leixlip T/1/06 stamp duty due €39,600 The tribunal directed: a) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit and proper person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) That the respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 13 July 2009, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) That the Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

Colm Murphy

Colm Murphy & Company, Solicitors, at Market Street, Kenmare, Co Kerry and as Murphys at 1 Chapel Street, Killarney

21 October 2003

In the matter of Colm Murphy, solicitor, practising as Colm Murphy & Company, Solicitors, at Market Street, Kenmare, Co Kerry, and as Murphys at 1 Chapel Street, Killarney, Co Kerry and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [5306/DT331] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Colm Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 21 October 2003, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed, up to the date of the swearing of the society's affidavit on 29 April 2002 without reasonable excuse, to comply with a direction of the Registrar's Committee of the Law Society of Ireland made on 29 May 2001 pursuant to section 8(1) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, advised and admonished b) Pay a sum of €4,000 to the compensation fund, and c) Comply with the direction of the Registrar's Committee of the Law Society of Ireland made on the 29 May 2002 pursuant to section 8(1) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994

Colm Murphy

Colm Murphy & Company, Solicitors, at Market Street, Kenmare, Co Kerry and as Murphys at 1 Chapel Street, Killarney

4 November 2004

In the matter of Colm Murphy, solicitor, practising as Colm Murphy & Company, Solicitors, at Market Street, Kenmare, Co Kerry and as Murphys at 1 Chapel Street, Killarney, Co Kerry, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors DisciplinaryTribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5306/DT446/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Colm Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 4 November 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that: a) He failed up to the date of the swearing of the Society's affidavit on 2 April 2004 to furnish documents, including title documents referred to in a letter of authority to the respondent solicitor from his former client dated 31 July 2003; b) He failed to reply to five letters from his former client's new solicitors between 1 August 2002 and 22 May 2003 requesting the said title documents; c) He failed to reply to correspondence from the Society The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the sum of €1,000 as restitution to his former client without prejudice to any legal right of his former client, d) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement, e) Hand over the entire file of his former client, the complainant, to the complainant's new solicitor within one month, without costs, on the basis that the complainant's new solicitor would take over the completion of the mortgage of the complainant


Colm Murphy

Colm Murphy & Company, Solicitors, at Market Street, Kenmare, Co Kerry

10 July 2007

In the matter of Colm Murphy (otherwise John C Murphy), a solicitor formerly practising as Colm Murphy & Company, Solicitors, at Market Street, Kenmare, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5306/DT27/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Colm Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 10 July 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to respond to numerous letters from the solicitor acting for the person entitled to administer an estate; b) Ignored multiple requests from the solicitor acting for the person entitled to administer the estate to submit the original grant of probate of the estate of the deceased to the Probate Office for cancellation; c) Caused the solicitor for the administrator to have to make an application to have the grant revoked; d) Through his conduct, caused delay and obstructed the solicitor in the administration of the estate of the deceased The tribunal made an order: a) Censuring the respondent solicitor, b) Directing the respondent solicitor to pay the sum of €10,000 to the compensation fund, c) Directing the respondent solicitor to pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, and witnesses' expenses, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Colm Murphy

Colm Murphy & Company, Solicitors, at Market Street, Kenmare, Co Kerry

10 July 2007

In the matter of Colm Murphy (otherwise John Colm Murphy), a solicitor formerly practising as Colm Murphy & Company, Solicitors, at Market Street, Kenmare, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5306/DT26/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Colm Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 10 July 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: 1) Failed to comply in full with the directions of the Registrar's Committee made on 4 November 2003 up to the date of the swearing of the Society's affidavit (on 27 April 2005), 2) Failed to respond to correspondence from the Society, in particular, letters dated 12 May 2004, 27 May 2004, 17 June 2004, 1 July 2004 and 12 July 2004 The tribunal made an order: a) Censuring the respondent solicitor, b) Directing the respondent solicitor to pay a sum of €4,000 to the compensation fund, c) Directing the respondent solicitor to pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Cornelius J Noonan

Newcastlewest, Co Limerick

10 April 2008

In the matter of Cornelius J Noonan, a solicitor practising under the style and title of Cornelius J Noonan at Newcastlewest, Co Limerick, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [1553/DT18/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Cornelius J Noonan (respondent solicitor) On 10 April 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 March 2006 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (Statutory Instrument no 421 of 2001), in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Daire M Murphy

Lyons Kenny Solicitors, 57 Fitzwilliam Square, Dublin 2

8 May 2008

In the matter of Daire M Murphy, solicitor, of Lyons Kenny Solicitors, 57 Fitzwilliam Square, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3874/DT42/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Daire M Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 8 May 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Up to the date of the swearing of the grounding affidavit of the Law Society of Ireland on 25 May 2007, failed to comply in full with the undertaking given by him to the complainant's firm and failed to so do despite requests for compliance by the complainant, and b) Failed, in particular, up to the date of the swearing of the Society's grounding affidavit, to furnish deeds of release of mortgage in respect of the mortgages in favour of ICC Bank (now Bank of Scotland), as required by the terms of the said undertaking The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €7,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, and witnesses' expenses, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Damian P Moynihan

Moynihan Mulvihill & Co 6 Cornmarket Street, Cork

12 July 2004

In the matter of Damian P Moynihan and Sean A Mulvihill, solicitors, formerly carrying on practice under the style and title of Moynihan Mulvihill & Co at 6 Cornmarket Street, Cork, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [S8171/S8208/DT] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Damian P Moynihan (first respondent solicitor) Sean A Mulvihill (second respondent solicitor) Reference to 'regulation' is a reference to the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (no 2) of 1984, statutory instrument no 304 of 1984 On 12 July 2004, the president of the High Court made an order that the name of the first respondent solicitor, Damian P Moynihan, be struck off the roll of solicitors The president had before him the report of the Disciplinary Tribunal dated 18 May 2004 in which the tribunal found that the first-named respondent had been guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: i) Failed to maintain proper books of account in breach of regulation 10 so that there was uncertainty as to the true position in respect of client funds ii) Failed to enter full details, and in some cases failed to enter any details at all, on cheque stubs and lodgment stubs in breach of regulation 19(1)(c) iii) Failed to enter virtually any information in the books of account as to the sources of money received and details of cheque payees in breach of regulation 19(1)(c) iv) Created debit balances on the client account in breach of regulation 7 v) Allowed a deficit to arise in client monies which stood at ε£31,805 as at 8 October 2001 and which subsequently rose to ε£56,662 in breach of regulation 7 vi) Failed to disclose the misappropriation of client monies of ε£7,500 vii) Misled the reporting accountant by leading him to believe that a sum of ε£7,500 introduced into the client account in 2001 was to clear a deficit arising in the financial practice year end 31 December 2000 when in fact it related to the misappropriation of monies by Mr Moynihan in July 2001 to purchase a car viii) Misled the Compensation Fund Committee on 6 December 2001, representing to the committee that the sum of ε£7,500 had been introduced into the client account to clear a deficit arising in the financial practice year end 31 December 2000 when in fact it related to the misappropriation of monies by Mr Moynihan in July 2001 to purchase a car ix) Advanced approximately ε£10,000 of clients' monies to a client when these monies did not stand to the credit of that client and therefore advanced to him other client monies in breach of regulation 7 x) Concealed from the society and the reporting accountant the misappropriation of ε£7,500 by Mr Moynihan xi) Failed to file the accountant's report covering the firm's financial year ended 31 December 2000 within six months of the accounting date in breach of regulation 21(1) The tribunal further found that there had been misconduct on the part of the first-named respondent solicitor, Damian P Moynihan, in that he: a) Misappropriated ε£7,500, being stamp duty and outlay received from a client b) Falsified the books of account to conceal his misappropriation of client monies c) When questioned about the matter, untruthfully stated that the deed had been stamped d) Falsely stated to the Compensation Fund Committee at its meeting on 4 October 2001 that ε£15,000 had been introduced into the client account to clear the deficit when no such monies, or any monies, had been paid into the client account e) Untruthfully advised the society's accountant that an army deafness case had been settled for ε£47,500 and that the settlement cheque was awaited when the case had not in fact been settled f) Advanced ε£10,615 and ε£15,357, totalling ε£25,972, to the client, the claimant in the army deafness case referred to at (e), when there were no monies to the credit of the client and thereby advanced other clients' monies to him g) Forged his partner's name on the cheque for ε£15,357 advanced to the client in the army deafness case referred to at (f) above h) Falsely represented to the credit union of the client referred to at (e) and (f) above in a letter of undertaking that the client's case had been settled for ε£47,500 i) Caused his client's credit union to advance ε£20,000 on foot of the false representation referred to at (g) above j) Allowed a further undertaking to be given to the said credit union by Mr Mulvihill causing the said credit union to advance a further ε£12,000 k) Falsely represented to the practice's reporting accountant that a loan of ε£7,500 was lodged to the client account to clear a deficit identified by the reporting accountant for the practice year ended 31 December 2000 l) Falsely represented to the society that he had obtained a loan of ε£7,500 which was to be paid into the client account to rectify the deficit in this amount caused by his own misappropriation m) Forged and uttered a document purporting to be an order of the District Court contrary to sections 3 and 6 of the Forgery Act 1913 On 22 April 2004, the Disciplinary Tribunal found the second-named respondent solicitor, Sean A Mulvihill, guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to maintain proper books of account in breach of regulation 10, so that there was uncertainty as to the true position in respect of client funds b) Failed to enter full details, and in some cases failed to enter any details at all, on cheque stubs and lodgment stubs in breach of regulation 19(1)(c) c) Failed to enter virtually any information in the books of account as to the sources of money received and details of cheque payees in breach of regulation 19(1)(c) d) Created debit balances in breach of regulation 7 e) Allowed a deficit to arise in client monies which stood at ε£31,805 as at 8 October 2001 and which subsequently rose to ε£56,662 in breach of regulation 7 f) Failed to disclose the misappropriation of client monies by the first-named respondent solicitor of ε£7,500 g) Advanced approximately ε£10,000 of clients' monies to a client when these monies did not stand to the credit of that client and therefore advanced to him other client monies in breach of regulation 7 h) Failed to file an accountant's report covering the firm's financial year ended 31 December 2000 within six months of the accounting date in breach of regulation 21(1) The tribunal made an order in respect of the second-named solicitor as follows: a) Censuring the respondent solicitor b) Directing the respondent solicitor to pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master

Daniel J Shields

VP Shields & Sons Solicitors, Westbridge, Loughrea, Co Galway

16 January 2007

In the matter of Daniel J Shields, a solicitor practising under the style and title of VP Shields & Sons Solicitors at Westbridge, Loughrea, Co Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5713/DT473/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Daniel J Shields (respondent solicitor) On 16 January 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to comply with his undertakings given to the complainant's solicitors on 1 and 3 June 1993 in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Stand admonished, b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Daniel P Hurley

DP Hurley & Company, Solicitors, 5 Mary Street, Galway and as John NM Lavelle at The Sound, Westport, Co Mayo

13 December 2004

The High Court, 2004, no 164 SA In the matter of Daniel P Hurley, solicitor, practising as DP Hurley & Company, Solicitors, at 5 Mary Street, Galway and as John NM Lavelle at The Sound, Westport, Co Mayo, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [6611/DT445/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Daniel P Hurley (respondent solicitor) On 12 October 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in respect of the following complaints in that he: a) Allowed a deficit to arise in his client account, quantified at ε£297,436 as of 30 September 2000 b) Allowed ε£231,943 of the deficit to arise when monies were drawn from a deposit received on behalf of a client in circumstances where the deposit should have been left intact pending execution of the contract c) Made a false declaration of the total consideration in relation to a conveyancing transaction in a 'particulars delivered' document required by the Revenue Commissioners for the purposes of ascertaining stamp duty liability as set out in paragraph 22 of the investigation report dated 22 January 2001, thereby defrauding the Revenue of the correct amount of the stamp duty payable d) Disclosed that he was involved in obtaining ε£80,000 cash in ε£20 notes and was present when the ε£80,000 was paid under the counter as part of the purchase price of a property being purchased by a named company as set out in paragraph 22 of the investigation report, thereby defrauding the Revenue e) Disclosed that he was involved in obtaining ε£20,000 in cash and was present when the ε£20,000 was paid to the spouse of the vendor of a property being purchased by a named company as set out in paragraph 22 of the investigation report, thereby defrauding the Revenue f) Was a one-third shareholder of a named company in respect of which he was also the company solicitor The solicitor on multiple occasions used other clients' monies drawn from the client account for the benefit of the company concerned, causing debit balances to arise in respect of the company in the clients' ledger The debit balance in the client ledger account in respect of the company amounted to ε£599,13142 as of 30 September 2000 g) Drew other clients' monies out of the client account, which he utilised for his holiday home h) On a number of occasions, as set out in the investigation report, misappropriated clients' monies on or about times when office account payments were dishonoured by his bank i) On three occasions paid wages out of the client account, which accounted for ε£1,045 of the deficit as of 30 September 2000 j) Partly utilised clients' funds to discharge a payment of ε£4,86874 arising out of proceedings issued against him for unpaid VAT and PAYE, as set out in paragraph 221 of the investigation report k) Misapplied approximately ε£27,000 of clients' monies between May and October 2000 when he created a debit balance of ε£27,76064 in total on a named client's ledger account l) Dissipated stakeholders' funds held on behalf of a named company amounting to ε£234,000, leaving only ε£2,05658, which was the main component of the deficit as at 30 September 2000 m) Borrowed clients' money belonging to a named company without written authorisation to do so The tribunal reported to the High Court and recommended that: a) The respondent solicitor not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner, that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing to be approved in advance by the Law Society b) The respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland to be taxed in default of agreement On 13 December 2004, the president of the High Court ordered that the respondent solicitor be prohibited from practising as a sole practitioner and that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing to be approved in advance by the Law Society and that the respondent solicitor do pay to the applicant its costs of and incident to the application and order and also the costs of the proceedings before the disciplinary tribunal, such costs to be taxed in default of agreement

David C Howard

Howard & Company, Solicitors, 2nd Floor, 15 South Mall, Cork

4 May 2006

In the matter of David C Howard, a solicitor carrying on practice under the style and title of Howard & Company, Solicitors, at 2nd Floor, 15 South Mall Cork, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5996/DT41/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) David C Howard (respondent solicitor) On 4 May 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to file his accountant's report for the year ended 31 August 2004 with the Society in a timely manner, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001; b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligations to comply with the regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of the clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

David Frawley

O'Hagan Ward & Company, Solicitors, 31/33 The Triangle, Ranelagh, Dublin 6

15 May 2008

In the matter of Ian Quentin Crivon and David Frawley, solicitors practising under the style and title of O'Hagan Ward & Company, Solicitors, 31/33 The Triangle, Ranelagh, Dublin 6, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [8308-2196/DT73/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ian Quentin Crivon (first-named respondent solicitor) David Frawley (second-named respondent solicitor) On 15 May 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the first-named respondent solicitor and the second-named respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in their practice as solicitors in that they failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 October 2006 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that: a) The first-named respondent solicitor do stand censured, b) The second-named respondent solicitor do stand advised and admonished, c) The first-named respondent solicitor pay a sum of €1,500 to the compensation fund, d) The second-named respondent solicitor pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, e) The first-named respondent solicitor and the second-named respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

David O'Shea

O'Donovan Solicitors, 73 Capel Street, Dublin 1

27 November 2008

In the matter of David O'Shea, a solicitor formerly practising in the firm of O'Donovan Solicitors, 73 Capel Street, Dublin 1, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6743/DT64/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) David O'Shea (respondent solicitor) On 27 November 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: 1) Failed to reply adequately to the Society's correspondence and, in particular, letters dated 4 October 2007, 19 October 2007, 9 November 2007, 18 December 2007, 24 January 2008, 7 March 2008, 19 March 2008 and 9 April 2008, 2) Failed to attend the Complaints and Client Relations Committee meeting on 16 April 2008, despite being directed to do so by the committee at its meeting of 4 March 2008 and despite having undertaken to do so in his letter of 29 February 2008 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: Do stand censured, Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund and that the respondent solicitor be given 12 months within which to pay the said sum of €1,000, Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement, but such costs to be limited to the costs incurred in respect of charges (1) and (2) above

David R Burke

David R Burke and Company, 24 Main St, Dungarvan, Co Waterford

17 June 2004

In the matter of David R Burke, solicitor, practising under the style and title of David R Burke & Company at 24 Main Street, Dungarvan, Co Waterford, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [6151/DT410] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) David R Burke (respondent solicitor) On 17 June 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to file his accountant's report for the year ended 30 June 2002, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001), in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Declan McCourt

McCourt & Company at Apollo's Wings, Defenders' Row, Dundalk, Co Louth

12 January 2006

In the matter of Declan McCourt, solicitor, practising as McCourt & Company at Apollo's Wings, Defenders' Row, Dundalk, Co Louth, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [S6951/DT/03/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Declan McCourt (respondent solicitor) On 12 January 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct as follows, in that he had: a) Failed up to the date of the swearing of the affidavit of the applicant (on 13 January 2005) to comply with an undertaking dated 3 January 2001 to a named building society in relation to a named property, b) Failed without reasonable cause to comply with a notice served on him pursuant to section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 within the time specified The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €10,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland and of any person appearing before the tribunal, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Deirdre Fahy

D Fahy & Associates, Solicitors, at 28/29 Castle Yard, Dalkey, Co Dublin

27 April 2010

In the matter of Deirdre Fahy, a solicitor practising as D Fahy & Associates, Solicitors, at 28/29 Castle Yard, Dalkey, Co Dublin, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [5471/DT119/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Deirdre Fahy (respondent solicitor) On 27 April 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2008 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001), having only filed same with the Society on 15 October 2009, b) Through her conduct, showed disregard for her statutory obligation to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €2,000 in respect of complaint (a) above and €1,000 in respect of complaint (b) above, totalling €3,000, to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Deirdre Nic Fhionnlaoich

MacGinley Solicitors, 3 Inns Quay, Chancery Place, Dublin 7

17 January 2008

In the matter of Deirdre Nic Fhionnlaoich, a solicitor practising as MacGinley Solicitors, 3 Inns Quay, Chancery Place, Dublin 7, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [2828/DT29/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Deirdre Nic Fhionnlaoich (respondent solicitor) On 17 January 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she had: a) Failed to reply to letters from her former clients' new solicitor requesting the transfer of her former clients' files with their authority to their new solicitor,b) Failed to furnish a bill of costs to her former clients' new solicitor, despite being requested to do so by letter dated 30 August 2005, c) Sought an undertaking that the costs of the legal costs accountant she proposed to engage to prepare her own bill of costs would be discharged by her former clients, when in fact this was her liability and not theirs, d) Represented to the Society in a letter to the Society, dated 13 April 2006, that she was sending the files to her former clients' new solicitor that day, but did not in fact forward the files, e) Subsequently failed to hand over the files within ten days, as directed by the committee on 26 April 2006 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay 50% of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Derek Stewart

Stewart & Company, 12 Parliament Street, Temple Bar, Dublin 2

21 October 2003

In the matter of Derek Stewart, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Stewart & Company, Solicitors, at 12 Parliament Street, Temple Bar, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts,1954 to 1994 [4498/DT337] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Derek Stewart (respondent solicitor) On 21 October 2003, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to file an accountant's report for the year ended 28 February 2001 in a timely manner or at all, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations no 2 of 1984 b) Failed to comply with a written undertaking given to the society on 31 January 2002 to complete and lodge his accountant's report for the year ended 28 February 2001 and 28 February 2002 on or before 31 March 2002 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay the sum of €7,500 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Derek Stewart

Stewart & Company, 12 Parliament Street, Temple Bar, Dublin 2

29 April 2004

In the matter of Derek Stewart, solicitor, practising under the style and title of Stewart & Company at 12 Parliament Street, Temple Bar, Dublin 2, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [4498/DT407] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Derek Stewart (respondent solicitor) On 29 April 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to comply in a timely manner with the letter of undertaking dated 5 July 2002 and in particular failed to furnish the complainant solicitors in a timely manner with a memorial to enable them to register the deed of release, the subject matter of the undertaking, in the registry of deeds b) Failed to attend at the Registrar's Committee meeting on 17 December 2002 despite being requested to do so c) Failed to respond to the society's correspondence and in particular the society's letters of 11 October 2002, 25 October 2002, 6 November 2002, 5 December 2002, 19 December 2002, 25 March 2003, 7 April 2003 and 12 May 2003 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund within 12 months from the date of the tribunal's order c) Pay a sum of €750 (as agreed by the parties) towards the costs of the Law Society of Ireland within 12 months of the date of the tribunal's order and, if sought, a further €250 towards the witness expenses of the complainant solicitor

Derek Stewart

Stewart & Company, 12 Parliament Street, Temple Bar, Dublin 2

29 April 2004

In the matter of Derek Stewart, solicitor, practising under the style and title of Stewart & Company at 12 Parliament Street, Temple Bar, Dublin 2, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [4498/DT419] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Derek Stewart (respondent solicitor) On 29 April 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to respond to the society's correspondence in a timely manner or at all b) Failed to attend at the Registrar's Committee meeting on 27 May 2003 despite being requested to do so c) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to the complainant solicitor on 31 May 2001 in a timely manner and in particular the following matters: (i) the furnishing of a certified copy of the head lease, (ii) the furnishing of the landlord's consent to the assignment and (iii) the furnishing of the deed of assignment duly signed and witnessed The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund within six months from the date of this order c) Pay a contribution of €750 (as agreed by the parties) towards the costs of the Law Society of Ireland within six months from the date of this order and a contribution of €250 towards the witness expenses of the complainant solicitor

Derek Stewart

Stewart & Company, 12 Parliament Street, Temple Bar, Dublin 2

3 November 2005

In the matter of Derek Stewart, a solicitor practising as Stewart & Co at 12 Parliament Street, Temple Bar, Dublin 2, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 [4498/DT31/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Derek Stewart (respondent solicitor) On 3 November 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had failed to file an accountant's report for the year ended 29 February 2004 with the society in a timely manner or at all, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, statutory instrument no 421 of 2001, having only filed same on 25 May 2005 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €250 to the compensation Fund, c) Pay a contribution of €500 to the Law Society of Ireland in respect of its costs

Desmond O'Brien

Cregg, Lahinch, Co Clare

14 June 2010

In the matter of Desmond O'Brien, solicitor, Cregg, Lahinch, Co Clare, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2008 [4952/DT58/09 and High Court record 2010 no 44SA) Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Desmond O'Brien (respondent solicitor) On 27 April 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) In April 2006, misappropriated €31,900 of clients' monies to purchase a motor car b) In April 2006, misappropriated €6,000 of clients' monies by means of a client account cheque payable to Bank of Ireland, which he used to purchase a bank draft payable to his wife, which was then lodged in their joint account in Bank of Ireland c) In May 2005, misappropriated €9,500 of clients' money by means of a client account cheque payable to Bank of Ireland, which he used to purchase a bank draft payable to his wife, which was then lodged in their joint account in Bank of Ireland d) In February 2006, misappropriated €5,200 of clients' money, which he then put into his credit card account e) In September 2006, misappropriated €21,500 of clients' money, which, according to the bank, was lodged to an account in his own name in AIB f) Caused or allowed a possible underpayment of CGT in the case of a named client arising from an alteration in the computation by the solicitor g) Deducted costs from the estate of a named deceased, in breach of the regulations, without issuing a bill of costs, and the amount involved was €2,178 h) In February 2006, misappropriated €3,224 of clients' money, which he used to pay into his accounts in GE Money, Bank of Ireland mortgages, and into a Bank of Ireland loan account i) Deprived the elderly beneficiary of the estate of a named deceased of her money for the three years up to when he ceased practice, having misappropriated some of the estate money for his own personal benefit j) In February 2006, misappropriated €3,000 of clients' money, with which he purchased an international bank draft payable to Bank Nationale de Paris and caused the cheque to be debited to the clients' ledger account of a named client, described as 'Bank of Ireland inheritance tax' k) On 3 July 2006, issued a client account cheque for €14,000 payable to the Revenue Commissioners, which was used with two other client account cheques to pay the stamp duty and penalty on a deed relating to a purchase by a named client that was completed in July 2004 He caused the cheque to be debited to the aforementioned named client's ledger account l) Paid the second part of the stamp duty and penalty on a named client's deed with a client account cheque for €3,684, which he caused to be debited to the client's ledger account of another named client and which he caused to be described in the books of account as 'Revenue Commissioners CGT' m) The third part of the stamp duty and penalty on a named client's deed he paid with an AIB bank draft for €11,141, which, more than 18 months earlier, on 16 January 2005, the solicitor had drawn from a named client's client account by means of a client account cheque payable to 'Allied Irish Banks for Revenue' and which the solicitor caused to be debited to the clients' ledger account of a named client n) In February 2006, misappropriated €663 of clients' money to pay his electricity bill o) In February 2006, misappropriated €417 of client's money to pay his wife's car insurance p) In February 2006, paid €665 to a named plant hire company and €28322 to a named refuse and recycling company These payments were debited to the client ledger account of a named deceased and there was nothing in that client's file to support the payments q) On 17 November 2006, misappropriated €700 of clients' money to pay his gas bill r) In February 2007, misappropriated clients' money of €2,72750 to pay his family's VHI bill The €2,72750 was misappropriated as part of a larger amount of clients' money, the balance of which was misappropriated as part of teeming and lading s) Misappropriated €4,250 of client's money, which he lodged into his credit card account in March 2008 t) In March 2008, misappropriated €2,000 of clients' money, which he paid into a mortgage account in Bank of Ireland held in his own and his wife's names u) In February 2008, misappropriated €5,000 of clients' money, which he lodged to his credit card account v) In July 2006, misappropriated €4,800 of clients' money, which he lodged to his credit card account w) In September 2005, misappropriated €5,000 of clients' money, which he lodged to his credit card account x) On 17 August 2005, issued a client account cheque for €15,700 payable to a named client The returned paid cheque shows that it was endorsed on the back with the name of a person bearing the same surname as the named client The solicitor caused the cheque to be wrongly debited to the estate account in the clients' ledger of a named client, described in the books as a named deceased's bequest, although there was no such beneficiary in that estate The books of account, however, show that the solicitor acted for the first-named client in the estate of a named deceased y) On 22 September 2006, misappropriated €13,250 of clients' money, which he used to make a payment of €6,000 to a bank in France, €3,500 into his credit card account, and the balance of €3,750 was lodged into a joint account in his and his wife's name z) Caused the bookkeeper/accountant to make false and misleading entries in the books of account The tribunal recommended that the matter be sent forward to the President of the High Court and, on 14 June 2010, the President of the High Court made an order that the name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors and that the Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings before the High Court and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

Eamon P Comiskey

Eamon Comiskey & Company, Solicitors, Ballycarnan, Portlaoise, Co Laois

24 November 2009

In the matter of Eamon P Comiskey, a solicitor formerly practising as principal of Eamon Comiskey & Company, Solicitors, at Ballycarnan, Portlaoise, Co Laois, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [7337/DT84/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Eamon P Comiskey (respondent solicitor) On 24 November 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking dated 23 July 2007 to discharge and to furnish discharges in respect of a named bank covering the property purchased by the named complainant's client and, in particular, a named premises in Co Offaly in a timely manner or at all, b) Failed to reply to the Society's correspondence, and in particular to the Society's letters of 12 February 2009, 18 March 2009 and 31 March 2009 in a timely manner or at all, c) Failed to attend at the meetings of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 13 May 2009 and 24 June 2009, despite being required to do so, d) Failed to attend at a meeting of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 30 July 2009, despite being directed to so attend by order of the High Court made on 13 July 2009 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor do stand censured The tribunal made no order in respect of costs


Edward Farrell

Edward Farrell & Company, Solicitors, Irishtown, Athlone, Co Westmeath

31 January 2006

In the matter of Edward Farrell, a solicitor of Edward Farrell & Company, Solicitors, Irishtown, Athlone, Co Westmeath, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4555/DT475/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Edward Farrell (respondent solicitor) On 31 January 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had failed to file his accountant's report for the year ended 30 June 2003, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001), in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, b) Pay a contribution of €500 towards the costs of the Law Society of Ireland

Elizabeth Cazabon

Cazabon Solicitors, Atlanta House, Wolfe Tone Bridge, Galway

10 June 2009

In the matter of Elizabeth Cazabon, a solicitor practising as Cazabon Solicitors, Atlanta House, Wolfe Tone Bridge, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [8142/DT12/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Elizabeth Cazabon (respondent solicitor) On 6 October 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 March 2008 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (statutory instrument no 421 of 2001) in a timely manner or at all, b) Through her conduct, showed a disregard for her statutory obligations to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Elizabeth Farquharson

Herman Good & Company, Solicitors, 22/23 Dawson Street, Dublin 2

28 October 2008

In the matter of Elizabeth Farquharson, solicitor, and William A Stokes, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Herman Good & Company, Solicitors, at 22/23 Dawson Street, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3188-5032/DT83/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Elizabeth Farquharson and William A Stokes (respondent solicitors) On 28 October 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the first-named respondent solicitor and the second-named respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in their practices as solicitors in that they: a) Failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2006 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, SI no 421 of 2001, in a timely manner, b) Through their conduct, showed disregard for their statutory obligations to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the first-named respondent solicitor and the second-named respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Jointly and severally pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Jointly and severally pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Elizabeth McGrath

O'Connell McGrath Solicitors, 5 Athlunkard Street, Limerick

27 April 2010

In the matter of Elizabeth McGrath, a solicitor practising as O'Connell McGrath Solicitors, 5 Athlunkard Street, Limerick, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [11016/DT115/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Elizabeth McGrath (respondent solicitor) On 27 April 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor, in that she failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2008 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Eoin Joseph Lysaght

42 Tonlegee Road, Coolock, Dublin 5

24 February 2005

In the matter of Eoin Joseph Lysaght, solicitor, of 42 Tonlegee Road, Coolock, Dublin 5, and in the matter of an application by a client of the said Eoin Lysaght to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [4617/DT455/04] On 24 February 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had failed to provide details of the reasons for the nonprogress of his client's personal injury case The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund

Fergal T Kelly

Harmony Hill, Sligo, Co Sligo

6 July 2009

In the matter of Fergal T Kelly, solicitor, of Harmony Hill, Sligo, Co Sligo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [9451/DT21/08 and High Court record no 2009 no 37 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Fergal T Kelly (respondent solicitor) On 13 January 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that: a) He caused a deficit in client account of €3,044 at 30 September 2006, b) He caused debit balances of €21,61542 in the clients' ledgers, c) In the course of acting for a named client in a purchase of property, interest and penalty on the stamp duty of €7,630 were avoided because he 'updated' the deed to a date close to when the deed was submitted to the Revenue, d) In the course of acting for a named client in a purchase of property, interest and penalty on the stamp duty of €86,850 were avoided because he 'updated' the deed to a date close to when the deed was submitted to the Revenue, e) In the course of acting for named clients in a purchase of property, interest and penalty on the stamp duty of €9,880 were avoided because he 'updated' the deed to a date close to when the deed was submitted to the Revenue, f) In the course of acting for the same named clients in a purchase of another property, interest and penalty on the stamp duty of €8,19879 were avoided because he 'updated' the lease to a date close to when the lease was submitted to the Revenue, g) In the course of acting for named clients in a purchase of a property, interest and penalty on the stamp duty of €14,300 were avoided because he 'updated' the lease to a date close to when the lease was being submitted to the Revenue, h) In the course of acting for a named client (being the same client as referred to in paragraph (d)) in a purchase of another property, interest and penalty on the stamp duty of €72,000 were avoided because he 'updated' the deed to a date close to when the deed was submitted to the Revenue, i) In the course of acting for a named client in a purchase of a property, interest and penalty on stamp duty of €33,000 were avoided because he 'updated' the deed to a date close to when the deed was submitted to the Revenue, j) In the course of acting for the same named client in a purchase of another property, interest and penalty on the stamp duty of €5,100 were avoided because he 'updated' the deed to a date close to when the deed was submitted to the Revenue, k) In the course of acting for named clients in a purchase of a property, interest and penalty on the stamp duty of €4,350 were avoided because he 'updated' the deed to a date close to when the deed was submitted to the Revenue, l) In the course of acting for a named client (being the same client referred to in paragraphs (d) and (h)) in a purchase of another property, interest and penalty on the stamp duty of €18,000 were avoided because he 'updated' the deed to a date close to when the deed was submitted to the Revenue, m) In the course of acting for named clients in a purchase of a property, interest and penalty on the stamp duty of €2,760 were avoided because he 'updated' the deed to a date close to when the deed was submitted to the Revenue, n) In the course of acting for named clients in a purchase of a property, interest and penalty on the stamp duty of €5,555 were avoided because he 'updated' the deed to a date close to when the deed was submitted to the Revenue, o) He delayed in completing stamping and registration, p) He provided incorrect information to the Revenue in a letter dated 6 June 2006, while in the course of acting for a named client (being the same client referred to in paragraph (j)), when he stated that the deed of transfer was sent to the Revenue on 21 April 2006, q) He provided incorrect information to a named bank when he informed the bank that 12 contracts had been executed in relation to a development being carried out by a client who is a builder, r) During the investigation, he gave incorrect information to the investigating accountant when he stated that the transfer to his named clients was exempt from stamp duty because the clients were first-time buyers, and also when he stated that he had no unstamped deeds that should have been stamped, s) He failed to keep copies of some stamped deeds, t) Fees were debited to the office ledger when the costs were received instead of when the bills were issued The tribunal recommended that the respondent solicitor: a) Not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner; that he be permitted only to practise as a solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society, b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 27 April 2009 and 6 July 2009, the President of the High Court ordered that: 1) The respondent solicitor should not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner; that he be permitted only to practise as a solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, 2) The Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and before the said tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

Francis J Lowney

Doyle Lowney & Company Solicitors at Westgate, Wexford

4 March 2003

In the matter of Francis J Lowney, solicitor, carrying on practice in the firm of Doyle Lowney & Company Solicitors at Westgate, Wexford, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 1994 [2969/DT344] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Francis J Lowney (respondent solicitor) On 4 March 2003, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to transmit his file to the society in accordance with the society's recommendations and his agreement to do so in a timely manner or at all b) Failed to respond to the society's correspondence in the investigation of this complaint in a timely manner or at all, and in particular failed to reply to the following letters dated 4 December 2000, 18 December 2000, 9 February 2001, 20 March 2001, 20 April 2001, 9 May 2001, 22 May 2001, 29 June 2001, 21 August 2001, 5 September 2001, 18 September 2001, 11 October 2001, 9 November 2001, 23 November 2001, 6 December 2001, 10 January 2002, 23 January 2002, 7 February 2002, 22 March 2002 c) Failed to appear at the Registrar's Committee meeting on 19 March 2002 despite being requested to do so The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do pay the sum of €500 in respect of each finding of misconduct b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland to be taxed by the taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Francis McArdle

McArdle & Associates, 10 Roden Place, Dundalk, Co Louth

24 October 2006

In the matter of Francis McArdle, a solicitor practising as McArdle & Associates at 10 Roden Place, Dundalk, Co Louth, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [2472/DT41/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Francis McArdle (respondent solicitor) On 24 October 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2004 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, statutory instrument no 421 of 2001; b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligations to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Francis McArdle

McArdle & Associates, 10 Roden Place, Dundalk, Co Louth

15 April 2010

In the matter of Francis McArdle, a solicitor practising as McArdle & Associates, at 10 Roden Place, Dundalk, Co Louth, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [2472/DT113/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Francis McArdle (respondent solicitor) On 15 April 2010, the Solicitor Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2008 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001), b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligation to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Gabriel A Toolan

Walter P Toolan & Sons, Solicitors, Ballinamore, Co Leitrim

19 May 2009

In the matter of Gabriel A Toolan, a solicitor carrying on practice as Walter P Toolan & Sons, Solicitors, at Ballinamore, Co Leitrim, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [5821/DT08/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Gabriel A Toolan (respondent solicitor) On 19 May 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Delayed in paying stamp duty in respect of a number of purchases set out in the investigation report dated 18 April 2008 and only paid same and interest and penalties when the matter was brought to the solicitor's attention, b) Updated the transfer documentation in respect of a number of purchases where there had been a delay in paying stamp duty and to pay the correct stamp duty until such time as the matter was brought to the solicitor's attention following the investigation, c) Acted for a developer and a purchaser in a number of transactions in breach of section 4(a) of SI no 85/1997, Solicitors (Professional Practice) Conduct and Discipline) Regulations 1997, d) Transferred fees to the office account from monies held in trust and in one instance transferred fees in a probate file, where there was no authority to transfer fees, e) Backdated two letters, one in April 2004 and one in April 2005, the letters having been created in March 2008, f) Altered the date in an auctioneer's letter from 14 November 2005 to 27 April 2007 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €15,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

George C Copeland

Copeland McCaffrey Solicitors at PO box 9, 29 Patrick Street, Strabane, Co Tyrone, Strabane, United Kingdom

4 September 2003

In the matter of George C Copeland, solicitor, practising under the style and title of Copeland McCaffrey Solicitors at PO box 9, 29 Patrick Street, Strabane, Co Tyrone BT82 8DQ, Northern Ireland, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [4279/DT361] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) George C Copeland (respondent solicitor) The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal noted in its report to the president of the High Court that the respondent solicitor was admitted and enrolled in Northern Ireland in 1976 and in this jurisdiction on 30 November 1981 and now carries on practice as a solicitor and partner under the style and title of Dermot Walker & Company Solicitors, 6 Queen Street, Derry BT48 7FF, Northern Ireland On 4 September 2003, the tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Breached section 68(1) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 by failing to provide his (named) client with the particulars in writing prescribed by the section b) Breached section 68(2) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 by charging a solicitor-and-client fee over and above what was received on a party-and-party basis calculated as a percentage of the settlement amount plus VAT c) Breached section 68(3) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 by deducting or appropriating monies for fees from damages payable to his client d) Breached section 68(5) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 by deducting or appropriating monies for fees from the damages payable to his client, notwithstanding that there was no agreement in writing and in the form prescribed by section 68(5) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act,1994 e) Breached section 68(6) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 by failing to furnish to his client a bill of costs and as soon as practicable after the settlement of his case and in the form prescribed by the provisions of section 68(6) f) Breached section 68(8) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 by failing to take all appropriate steps to resolve the dispute between him and his client about the amount of legal costs charged by failing to inform his client in writing of his right of taxation and to make a complaint to the society under section 9 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 about alleged excessive charging g) Breached section 66(17) of the Solicitors Act, 1954 as amended by substitution by section 76 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 by lodging or causing to be lodged for collection an unendorsed cheque or other negotiable or non-negotiable instrument drawn in favour of his client h) Breached regulation 7(a)(iv) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations no 2 of 1984 by drawing money for costs from his client's account without having delivered to the client a bill of costs or other written intimation of the amount of the costs incurred The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay the sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society as taxed by the taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

George Wright

Wright Solicitors, Mill Street, Monaghan, Co Monaghan

25 November 2008

In the matter of George Wright, a solicitor practising as Wright Solicitors, Mill Street, Monaghan, Co Monaghan, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [2642/DT24/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) George Wright (respondent solicitor) On 25 November 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant in a letter of 6 August 2002 to furnish sealed discharge as soon as possible after closing, b) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant in a letter of 18 October 2002 to furnish sealed discharge of judgment mortgage, c) Failed to respond to the Society's letters of 5 October 2006, 19 October 2006, 6 November 2006, 4 December 2006, 8 January 2007, 18 January 2007, 7 March 2007, 30 March 2007 and 6 June 2007 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay to the compensation fund the sum of €1,000 in respect of charge (a) above, €500 in respect of charge (b) above and €2,000 in respect of charge (c) above, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Geraldine Scully

GA Scully & Company, Solicitors, 337 Ballyfermot Road, Dublin 10

2 November 2006

In the matter of Geraldine Scully, a solicitor of GA Scully & Company, Solicitors, 337 Ballyfermot Road, Dublin 10, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4267/DT39/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Geraldine A Scully (respondent solicitor) On 2 November 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2004 not later than six months after that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement In the matter of Geraldine Scully, a solicitor of GA Scully & Company, Solicitors, 337 Ballyfermot Road, Dublin 10, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4267/DT39/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Geraldine A Scully (respondent solicitor) On 2 November 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2004 not later than six months after that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Gerard Burns

Burns Nowlan Solicitors at 31 Main Street, Newbridge, Co Kildare

20 May 2008

In the matter of Gerard Burns, a solicitor practising as Burns Nowlan Solicitors at 31 Main Street, Newbridge, Co Kildare, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4600/DT22/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Gerard Burns (respondent solicitor) On 20 May 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to comply with the provisions of section 68(6) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 in relation to a named complainant's personal injury action The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Gerard Carthy

Connellan Solicitors, 3 Church Street, Longford

15 July 2004

In the matter of Gerard Carthy, a solicitor practising in partnership as Connellan Solicitors, 3 Church Street, Longford, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [4664/DT438] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Gerard Carthy (respondent solicitor) On 15 July 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in that he was in breach of the provisions of SI 85 of 1997 and in particular regulation 4(a) thereof, having been involved as a solicitor in a partnership acting for both vendor and purchaser in the sale and purchase for value of a newly constructed residential unit or a residential unit in course of construction, where the vendor is the builder of that residential unit or is associated with the builder of that residential unit The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised never to again breach the regulations b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland and of any person appearing before them as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Gerard Corcoran

James H Powell & Son, Solicitors, at East Green, Dunmanway, Co Cork

11 January 2010

In the matter of Gerard Corcoran, a solicitor previously carrying on practice as James H Powell & Son, Solicitors, at East Green, Dunmanway, Co Cork, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2008 [5559/DT22/09 and High Court record 2009 no 110SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Gerard Corcoran (respondent solicitor) On 17 November 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Caused or allowed a deficit of €340,645 to occur on the client account as of 31 July 2008, b) Failed to maintain proper books of account, with the result that the books of account did not show the true clients' funds position as of 31 July 2008, c) Misappropriated clients' money totalling €337,962 as of 31 July 2008, d) Concealed his misappropriation of clients' money through teeming and lading in the books of account, e) Initially denied that he had borrowed or taken clients' money (before subsequently going on to disclose that he had misappropriated clients' money), f) Incorrectly took client's money of €96,500 from a named client's ledger account to another client's ledger account where it helped to partly clear a debit balance of €152,49510 on another client's ledger account and, as a result, left a shortfall of €96,500 on the named client's ledger account, g) Subsequently incorrectly took the sum of €93,81669 from another named client's ledger account and used it to clear part of the shortfall on the client ledger account of the client mentioned at (f), h) Incorrectly caused a debit balance of €81,01308 on the client's ledger account mentioned at (g) when he transferred the above sum of €93,81669 therefrom, i) Caused transfers to be made between accounts in the clients' ledger without maintaining supporting documents to enable the transfers to be appropriately vouched, in breach of the regulations, j) Caused entries in the books of accounts to be backdated from March 2008 to October 2007, with the result that a debit balance of approximately €337,000 on the ledger account of a named client was concealed The tribunal ordered the Society to bring the matter forward to the High Court and, on Monday 11 January 2010, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the respondent solicitor should not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership, that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor or consultant in the employment and under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, 2) That the Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings in the High Court and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, to include witness expenses as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

Gerard Murphy

1 Goldsmith Terrace, Quinsboro Road, Bray, Co Wicklow

26 May 2004

In the matter of Gerard Murphy, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Gerard Murphy at 1 Goldsmith Terrace, Quinsboro Road, Bray, Co Wicklow, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 1994 [4354/DT349] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Gerard Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 26 May 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to attend at the Compensation Fund Committee meeting of 5 July 2001 despite being requested to do so and failed to explain his non-attendance at the meeting b) Failed to apply for a practising certificate for the year 2002 in a timely manner c) Failed to file evidence of having professional indemnity insurance cover in place for the year 2002 in a timely manner or at all d) Failed to file an accountant's report for the year ended 30 April 2001 in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished b) Pay the sum of €500, to be paid to the compensation fund in relation to the findings of misconduct at (a), (b) and (d) above c) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund in relation to the finding of misconduct at (c) above, and d) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Gerard Murphy

Gerard Murphy, Solicitor, 1 Goldsmith Terrace, Bray, Co Wicklow

22 October 2007

THE HIGH COURT 2007 No 32SA In the matter of Gerard Murphy, solicitor, practising as Gerard Murphy, Solicitor, at 1 Goldsmith Terrace, Bray, Co Wicklow, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4354/DT66/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Gerard Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 8 February 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to pay over a settlement cheque of €18,000 to the complainant in a timely manner, having received same in April 2005 and only paid the complainant in March 2006, 11 months later, b) Failed to comply with a section 10 notice dated 6 February 2006 in a timely manner, having only furnished his file to the Society on 3 May 2006, c) Attempted to charge the complainant fees of €2,26875 for time that he allegedly spent in dealing with her complaint to the Society, d) Failed to reply to the Society's letters of 8 September 2005, 16 September 2005, 20 October 2005 and 6 December 2005 in a timely manner or at all, e) Failed to reply to the specific enquiries set out in the Society's letter of 7 October 2005 in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the Law Society do bring such findings of the tribunal in respect of the respondent solicitor before the High Court, together with the report of the tribunal to the High Court, which report includes the opinion of the tribunal as to the fitness or otherwise of the respondent solicitor to be a member of the solicitors' profession, having regard to their findings and recommendations in respect of the sanction that should be imposed in regard to their findings in respect of the respondent solicitor On 22 October 2007, the President of the High Court ordered, pursuant to section 8 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1960 (as substituted by section 18 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 and amended by section 9 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 2002), that the respondent solicitor shall not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership, that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland

Gerard O'Connor

Dobbyn and McCoy Solicitors, 5 Colbeck St, Waterford, Co Waterford

1 December 2005

In the matter of Gerard O'Connor, solicitor, of Dobbyn & McCoy Solicitors, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 1994 [3503/DT356] Client in person (applicant) Gerard O'Connor (respondent solicitor) On 1 December 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to reply to the applicant's correspondence, b) Failed to reply to the Law Society's correspondence The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay 50% of the applicant's vouched expenses

Greg Casey

Casey & Co North Main Street, Bandon, Co Cork

24 March 2009

In the matter of Greg (otherwise John G) Casey, solicitor, practising in the firm of Casey & Co North Main Street, Bandon, Co Cork, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [5355/DT88/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Greg (otherwise John G) Casey (respondent solicitor) On 24 March 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to pay a contribution of €500 towards the Society's costs, levied by the Complaints and Client Relations Committee against the respondent solicitor on 28 March 2007, b) Failed to pay the increased levy of €1,000 towards the costs of the Society's investigation as levied by the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 26 September 2007 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,000 in restitution to the Law Society of Ireland, allowing a period of 12 months in which to pay


Greg O'Neill

Suite 109, The Capel Building, Mary's Abbey, Dublin 7

20 October 2010

In the matter of Greg O'Neill, solicitor, of Greg O'Neill, Solicitors, Suite 109, The Capel Building, Mary's Abbey, Dublin 7, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [3365/DT/73/09] Named client (applicant) Greg O'Neill (respondent solicitor) On 20 October 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to return telephone calls (to his named client) for the past six months The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €750 to the compensation fund

Harry McCullagh

Harry McCullagh & Company, Solicitors, Rathmore House, Rathmore Lawn, South Douglas Road, Cork

3 November 2009

In the matter of Harry McCullagh, a solicitor carrying on practice as Harry McCullagh & Company, Solicitors, Rathmore House, Rathmore Lawn, South Douglas Road, Cork, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [7428/DT57/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Harry McCullagh (respondent solicitor) On 3 November 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Was involved in a process of late stamping and updating of deeds totalling €177,523 in 12 files, b) Allowed a deed to be updated from November 2004 to May 2007 with stamp duty in the amount of €79,650, c) Allowed a deed to be updated from February 2006 to August 2008 with stamp duty in the amount of €17,100, d) Allowed a deed to be updated from March 2004 to January 2009, resulting in the underpayment of stamp duty of €2,150, e) Allowed a deed to be updated from November 2006 to January 2009, resulting in the underpayment of stamp duty of €4,980, f) Allowed a deed to be updated from November 2004 to November 2008, resulting in the underpayment of stamp duty in the sum of €5,500 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €15,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Helen Lucey

Marshall & Macauley Solicitors, The Square, Listowel, Co Kerry

30 July 2008

In the matter of Helen Lucey, a solicitor practising under the style and title of Marshall & Macauley Solicitors, The Square, Listowel, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3012/DT101/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Helen Lucey (respondent solicitor) On 30 July 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Was in serious delay in handing over the file of her client to his new solicitors, b) Failed to respond to multiple correspondence from her client's new solicitors about taking up her former client's file, c) Effectively prevented her former client's case being progressed by retaining her former client's file from August 2005 to 28 April 2006, d) Failed to reply to multiple correspondence from the Society, e) Failed to comply with a direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 1 February 2006, f) Through her conduct, demonstrated a cavalier attitude towards the Society's statutory obligation to investigate and deal with complaints, g) Through her conduct, showed a complete lack of concern towards her former client and, in particular, given the circumstances of her former client The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the sum of €10,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Helen Lucey

Marshall & Macauley Solicitors, The Square, Listowel, Co Kerry

30 July 2008

In the matter of Helen Lucey, a solicitor practising under the style and title of Marshall & Macauley Solicitors, The Square, Listowel, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3012/DT14/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Helen Lucey (respondent solicitor) On 30 July 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Was in serious delay in completing the distribution of moneys in an estate between 2001 and 2006, b) Retained moneys due to the beneficiaries from 2001 to 2006, c) Despite numerous attempts by the person acting on behalf of the beneficiaries to find out what was happening in relation to the estate between June 2003 and June 2004, did not respond to these enquiries, d) Failed to comply within the time specified with a notice pursuant to section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994, dated 26 September 2004, e) Failed to subsequently give priority to the file as directed by the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 9 February 2005, f) Failed to furnish two monthly reports as directed by the committee on 9 February 2005, g) Failed to reply to subsequent correspondence from the complainant, h) Caused the complainant considerable distress, as evidenced by the complainant's letter to the Society dated 9 May 2005, i) Failed to reply to numerous letters from the Society, j) Failed to comply with a direction of the committee of 1 February 2006 that she transfer the file to another solicitor to be nominated by the complainant, pursuant to section 8(1)(d) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994, k) Notwithstanding that the foregoing direction had become absolutely binding upon her, retained the file concerned and continued to deal with it, l) Failed to comply with the further direction of the committee on 1 February 2006 that she submit a full and satisfactory response to the complaint of the complainant, and notwithstanding that this direction had become absolutely binding upon her, m) Failed to respond to the letter from the complainant to her, dated 16 May 2006, in relation to what the complainant believed was the payment of an incorrect amount to her as her share of her mother's estate and the question of the payment of interest, n) Through her conduct, showed a serious disregard for the statutory responsibility of the Society as the statutory regulator of the solicitors' profession, o) Through her conduct, showed a serious disregard for the Society as a statutory regulator of the solicitors' profession The tribunal made an order: a) Censuring the respondent solicitor, b) Ordering the respondent solicitor to pay the sum of €11,000 to the compensation fund, c) Ordering the respondent solicitor to pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement The tribunal took into account the following findings of misconduct on the part of the respondent solicitor previously made by them (and their predecessors, the Disciplinary Committee) and not rescinded by the High Court and in respect of the respondent solicitor, namely: ε΄ Order of the High Court made on 22 February 1986, ε΄ Order of the High Court made on 16 January 1989, ε΄ Order of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal made on 21 June 2001, ε΄ Order of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal made on 21 June 2001, ε΄ Order of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal made on 5 July 2004

Hilary Fitzpatrick

HL Fitzpatrick & Company, Solicitors, Church Street, Ballyconnell, Co Cavan

17 November 2009

In the matter of Hilary Fitzpatrick, a solicitor carrying on practice as HL Fitzpatrick & Company, Solicitors, at Church Street, Ballyconnell, Co Cavan, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4253/DT76/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Hilary Fitzpatrick (respondent solicitor) On 17 November 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Altered a deed of transfer from the date of actual transfer in November 2005 to a date in May 2007, b) Altered a family home declaration by dating it 31 August 2007, although it had been supplied for the purposes of completion of a transaction in November 2005, c) Retained monies for stamp duty where the transaction was exempt from duty, d) Gave the Society an assurance by letter dated 8 June 2009 that he had no difficulty in relation to the stamping or registration of documents on files when in the file the subject matter of the complaint alone this confirmation was untrue, e) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence and in particular the Society's letters of 29 November 2007, 17 December 2007, 16 April 2008, 12 September 2008, 2 February 2009, 17 February 2009, 17 April 2009 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Hilary Fitzpatrick

HL Fitzpatrick & Company, Solicitors, Church Street, Ballyconnell, Co Cavan

17 November 2009

In the matter of Hilary Fitzpatrick, a solicitor carrying on practice as HL Fitzpatrick & Company, Solicitors, at Church Street, Ballyconnell, Co Cavan, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4253/DT77/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Hilary Fitzpatrick (respondent solicitor) On 17 November 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Updated a deed from May 2003 to 28 May 2007, thereby avoiding the payment of interest and penalties on the deed, b) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence and, in particular, the Society's letters of 20 December 2007, 4 February 2008, 16 April 2008, 11 August 2008, 29 August 2008, 28 October 2008 and 12 January 2009, c) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee at its meeting of 13 May 2009 that he, within four weeks, furnish to the Society a letter confirming that he had not outstanding difficulties in relation to stamping and registration of documents on any of his files The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Hilary Fitzpatrick

HL Fitzpatrick & Company, Solicitors, Church Street, Ballyconnell, Co Cavan

27 April 2010

In the matter of Hilary Fitzpatrick, a solicitor carrying on practice as HL Fitzpatrick & Company, Solicitors, at Church Street, Ballyconnell, Co Cavan, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2008 [4253/DT64/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Hilary Fitzpatrick (respondent solicitor) On 27 April 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Allowed a deficit of €54,769 to occur on the client account as of the accounting date, which deficit was due to the existence of client ledger debit balances in breach of regulation 7 of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, b) Updated a number of deeds in relation to the payment of stamp duty as identified in paragraph 28 of the investigation report dated 6 November 2008, and in particular: i) Updated a deed in respect of a purchase for €965,000 completed on 31 May 2006 by dating the transfer 2 July 2008, thereby avoiding interest and penalties, ii) Updated a deed in respect of a purchase for €500,000 completed on 16 April 2007 by dating the deed July 2008, thereby avoiding interest and penalties, iii) Updated a deed in respect of a purchase for €375,000 completed on 14 October 2005 by dating the deed 31 May 2006, thereby avoiding interest and penalties, iv) Updated a deed in respect of a purchase for €635,000 completed on 10 February 2006 by dating the deed February 2008, thereby resulting in the imposition of a lower stamp duty regime introduced under Budget 2007, v) Updated a deed in respect of a purchase for €370,000 completed on 21 February 2007 by dating the deed 24 January 2008, thereby avoiding interest and penalties, vi) Updated a deed in respect of a purchase for €225,0000 completed on 12 July 2007 by stamping the deed on 2 April 2008, thereby resulting in a saving of stamp duty of €2,000, vii) Updated a deed in respect of a purchase completed on 23 April 2005, which deed was stamped in August 2008 with no evidence of interest and penalties paid The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal gave the following reasons for its decision, saying that it had taken consideration of: The submissions made by the parties, including the submission made on behalf of the respondent solicitor that he had paid huge amounts of money by way of penalty to the Revenue, That a limited practising certificate would not be feasible, and That the respondent solicitor, through his solicitors, had indicated that he would be winding down his practice within the year In addition, the tribunal stated as follows: while the monetary penalty the tribunal imposed was modest, it should not be taken as being an indication that the tribunal viewed the matter as non-serious The tribunal did view this matter as serious, but had regard to the present financial circumstances of the respondent solicitor

Hilary Molloy

Blake & Kenny, Solicitors, 2 Francis Street, Galway

12 December 2006

In the matter of Hilary Molloy, a solicitor of Blake & Kenny, Solicitors, 2 Francis Street, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5607/DT480/04] Clients of the respondent solicitor (applicants) Hilary Molloy (respondent solicitor) On 12 December 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor for the following reasons: The respondent solicitor was retained by the applicants in March 2001 to provide legal services for the land registry of their family home They have received no correspondence from the respondent solicitor as to the completion of this work The respondent solicitor failed to carry out the said work in a timely fashion That she, in her responding affidavit dated 26 November 2004, has falsely tried to implicate the applicants as the reason for her lack of attention to their file The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay the sum of €200 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the sum of €1,000 towards the costs of the applicants

Ian Quentin Crivon

O'Hagan Ward & Company, Solicitors, 31/33 The Triangle, Ranelagh, Dublin 6

22 September 2005

In the matter of Ian Quentin Crivon, practising under the style and title of O'Hagan, Ward & Company Solicitors, 31/33 The Triangle, Ranelagh, Dublin 6, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 [2196/DT15/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ian Quentin Crivon (respondent solicitor) On 22 September 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor, in that he failed to file his accountant's report for the year ended 31 October 2003 in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) in a timely manner, having only filed same with the society on 7 February 2005 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay a contribution of €500 to the Law Society of Ireland as part of the society's costs

Ian Quentin Crivon

O'Hagan Ward & Company, Solicitors, 31/33 The Triangle, Ranelagh, Dublin 6

15 May 2008

In the matter of Ian Quentin Crivon and David Frawley, solicitors practising under the style and title of O'Hagan Ward & Company, Solicitors, 31/33 The Triangle, Ranelagh, Dublin 6, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [8308-2196/DT73/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Ian Quentin Crivon (first-named respondent solicitor) David Frawley (second-named respondent solicitor) On 15 May 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the first-named respondent solicitor and the second-named respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in their practice as solicitors in that they failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 October 2006 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that: a) The first-named respondent solicitor do stand censured, b) The second-named respondent solicitor do stand advised and admonished, c) The first-named respondent solicitor pay a sum of €1,500 to the compensation fund, d) The second-named respondent solicitor pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, e) The first-named respondent solicitor and the second-named respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

J Finbarr O'Gorman

Finbarr O'Gorman Solicitors, Mayfield, Hollyfort Road, Gorey, Co Wexford

21 July 2009

In the matter of J Finbarr O'Gorman, a solicitor practising as Finbarr O'Gorman, Solicitors, at Mayfield, Hollyfort Road, Gorey, Co Wexford, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [7672/DT43/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) J Finbarr O'Gorman (respondent solicitor) On 21 July 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply entirely with his undertaking dated 6 August 2004 to a named company and his undertaking to a named solicitor's firm on behalf of their clients given on 12 October 2004, b) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence of 11 August 2008, 15 September 2008 and 26 September 2008 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €750 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

J Finbarr O'Gorman

Finbarr O'Gorman Solicitors, Mayfield, Hollyfort Road, Gorey, Co Wexford

14 June 2010

In the matter of J Finbarr O'Gorman, a solicitor previously practising as Finbarr O'Gorman Solicitors at Mayfield, Hollyfort Road, Gorey, Co Wexford, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2008 [7672/DT132/09 and High Court Record no 2010 no 46SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) J Finbarr O'Gorman (respondent solicitor) On 13 April 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor, in that he allowed a deficit of €34,82520 to arise in the client account of his practice, as of 30 April 2009, which deficit was due to the existence of a number of client ledger debit balances as a result of overpayments to clients in breach of regulation 7(2) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal referred the matter forward to the President of the High Court and, on 14 June 2010, the President of the High Court made an order as follows: a) That the respondent solicitor should not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership, that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor in the employment and under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, b) That the Law Society do recover the cost of the proceedings in the High Court and the cost of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, to include all witnesses' expenses, from the respondent, when taxed and ascertained

J Finbarr O'Gorman

Finbarr O'Gorman Solicitors, Mayfield, Hollyfort Road, Gorey, Co Wexford

14 June 2010

In the matter of J Finbarr O'Gorman, a solicitor previously practising as Finbarr O'Gorman Solicitors at Mayfield, Hollyfort Road, Gorey, Co Wexford, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2008 [7672/DT60/09 and High Court Record no 2010 no 45SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) J Finbarr O'Gorman (respondent solicitor) On 16 February 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to the EBS Building Society on 19 August 2007 in a timely manner or at all, b) Failed to ensure that the borrower would acquire good marketable title to the property the subject matter of the undertaking in a timely manner or at all, c) Parted with the loan cheque prior to having any executed documentation in relation to the transfer or the mortgage over the property, thereby failing to protect the interests of the EBS Building Society, which was relying on his undertaking The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal referred the matter forward to the President of the High Court The President of the High Court on 14 June 2010 made an order as follows: a) That the respondent solicitor not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership, that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor in the employment and under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, b) That the Law Society do recover the cost of the proceedings before the High Court and the cost of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, to include all witnesses' expenses, from the respondent when taxed and ascertained

Jacqueline M Durcan

Durcans Solicitors, 1 Hazel Grove, Spencer Park, Castlebar, Co Mayo

16 September 2008

In the matter of Jacqueline M Durcan, a solicitor practising as Durcans Solicitors at 1 Hazel Grove, Spencer Park, Castlebar, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [7083/DT23/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Jacqueline M Durcan (respondent solicitor) On 16 September 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Failed to respond adequately or at all to correspondence from the complainant, b) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence, and in particular to the letters sent to the respondent solicitor by the Society on 23 March 2004, 28 April 2004, 17 May 2004, 16 June 2006, 4 July 2006, 13 July 2006, 26 July 2006, 28 September 2006 and 19 October 2006, c) Failed to register her client's title to property at a named location in Co Mayo in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Jacqueline M Durcan

Durcans Solicitors, 1 Hazel Grove, Spencer Park, Castlebar, Co Mayo

26 February 2009

In the matter of Jacqueline M Durcan, a solicitor practising as Durcans Solicitors at 1 Hazel Grove, Spencer Park, Castlebar, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [7083/DT84/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Jacqueline M Durcan (respondent solicitor) On 26 February 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Failed to finalise the administration of the estate of a named deceased, who died on 22 March 2002, in a timely manner or at all, b) Deducted fees in relation to the administration of the estate in the sum of €6,000 plus VAT without the issue of a bill of costs at the time of the deduction and without advising the executrix that this deduction had been made, c) Deducted fees in relation to a named sale in or around May 2003 without the issue of a bill of costs and without advising the executrix that this deduction had been made, d) Deducted fees in relation to another named sale in or around 2002 without providing a bill of costs and without informing the executrix that this deduction had been made, e) Failed to comply with her undertaking at the meeting of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 1 February 2006 to furnish an up-to-date account where fees had been drawn and a full statement of account and a bill of costs in respect of each account in relation to the matters and copies of such correspondence, to be furnished to the Society within 14 days, f) Failed to comply with the direction made at the Complaints and Client Relations Committee's meeting on 20 September 2006 in a timely manner or at all, g) Failed to deal with correspondence from the Society in a timely manner or at all and, in particular, failed to reply to the following letters from the Society: 27 June 2005, 25 July 2005, 26 August 2005, 26 September 2005, 12 October 2005, 26 October 2005, 2 February 2006, 3 April 2006, 10 April 2006, 28 April 2006, 16 May 2006, 19 May 2006, 17 July 2006, 22 August 2006, 7 September 2006, 16 January 2007, 16 February 2007, 1 March 2007, 9 March 2007, 21 March 2007 and 3 April 2007 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

James Dennison

Dennison Solicitors, Main Street, Abbeyfeale, Co Limerick

30 September 2008

In the matter of James Dennison, a solicitor of Dennison Solicitors, Main Street, Abbeyfeale, Co Limerick, and in the matter of an application by named clients of the respondent solicitor to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [7883/DT54/07] Named clients of the respondent solicitor (applicants) James Dennison (respondent solicitor) On 30 September 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Acted in a deceitful and duplicitous manner in the course of acting on behalf of a client in the purchase of property, b) Caused financial loss and suffering to a client as a result of negligence and unprofessional conduct during a property transaction while acting as a solicitor, c) Failed to act in the interest of his client by failing to give correct advice or knowingly gave incorrect advice in relation to planning matters The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the sum of €10,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the sum of €3,630 in restitution to the applicants, without prejudice to any legal right of such party, d) Pay the applicants reasonable expenses for attending the hearings of the tribunal

James J O'Donoghue

James J O'Donoghue & Company, Solicitors, Shournagh House, Tower, Blarney, Co Cork

9 March 2010

In the matter of James J O'Donoghue, solicitor, carrying on practice as James J O'Donoghue & Company, Solicitors, Shournagh House, Tower, Blarney, Co Cork, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4697/DT19/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) James J O'Donoghue (respondent solicitor) On 9 March 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) In a conveyancing matter identified in the Law Society's investigation report, deeds were updated from April 2006 to October 2007, notwithstanding the fact that the solicitor was in funds to pay the stamp duty at the correct time The PD form was updated to 19 October 2007 b) In another conveyancing matter identified, deeds were updated in order to reduce the penalties from €75,056 to €46,656, and the PD form in that matter, which was identified in the investigation report, was altered to 15 November 2007, although the sale closed in June 2006 c) In another conveyancing matter, stamp duty of €19,139 remained unpaid from a transaction that closed in May 2007, notwithstanding that the money remained in the solicitor's account d) In a transaction involving the purchase of lands, funds of €20,000 remained in the ledger although this sale closed in January 2007 e) In another matter identified in the investigation report, deeds were not stamped until January 2007, although the sale closed in July 2004 and penalties were paid from funds remaining in the client ledger, notwithstanding the fact that the solicitor was in funds to stamp the deeds at the correct time f) The solicitor acted for both vendor and purchaser in new house transactions identified in the investigation report in apparent breach of SI no 85 of 1997, the Solicitors (Professional Conduct and Discipline) Regulations of 1997 g) Section 68 letters were inserted into files requested for inspection These section 68 letters had never been submitted to the clients and the solicitor admitted that they were prepared for the purposes of the inspection The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €7,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement The tribunal noted the respondent solicitor's undertaking to discharge the Law Society's costs in respect of the investigation of the respondent solicitor's practice by the Society's investigating accountant on 9 December 2009

James M Sweeney

James M Sweeney, 14 New Cabra Road, Phibsboro, Dublin 7

4 November 2003

In the matter of James M Sweeney, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of James M Sweeney at 14 New Cabra Road, Phibsborough, Dublin 7, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [3572/DT393] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) James M Sweeney (respondent solicitor On 4 November 2003, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to reply to correspondence from the society b) Failed to attend a meeting of the Registrar's Committee when requested to do so arising out of his failure to reply to the society's correspondence c) Was in serious delay in administering the estates of a family d) Failed to answer multiple correspondence from the solicitors for the complainant The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: i) Do stand censured in respect of the findings set out at (a) and (b) above ii) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund in relation to the finding set out at (c) above iii) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund in relation to the finding set out at (d) above iv) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by the taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

James M Sweeney

James M Sweeney, 14 New Cabra Road, Phibsboro, Dublin 7

27 April 2010

In the matter of James M Sweeney, a solicitor practising as James M Sweeney at 14 New Cabra Road, Phibsboro, Dublin 7, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [3572/DT46/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) James M Sweeney (respondent solicitor) On 27 April 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to reply to correspondence from the complainant solicitor, dated 22 May 2006, 11 October 2006, 22 January 2007, 1 March 2007, 3 July 2007 and 7 November 2007, and b) Failed to reply to letters from the Society to him, dated 4 December 2007, 18 December 2007, 14 January 2008, 22 January 2008, 31 January 2008 and 12 February 2008 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €6,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

James O'Mahony

James O'Mahony, Solicitor, at 16 Stoneybatter, Dublin 7

6 March 2007

In the matter of James O'Mahony, a solicitor practising under the style and title of James O'Mahony, Solicitor, at 16 Stoneybatter, Dublin 7, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4831/DT76/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) James O'Mahony (respondent solicitor) On 6 March 2007, the SolicitorsDisciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 August 2005 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors'Accounts Regulations 2001; c) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligations to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the coss of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement


James O'Mahony

James O'Mahony, Solicitor, at 16 Stoneybatter, Dublin 7

30 May 2009

In the matter of James O'Mahony, a solicitor practising under the style and title of James O'Mahony, Solicitor, at 16 Stoneybatter, Dublin 7, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4831/DT15/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) James O'Mahony (respondent solicitor) On 30 June 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with a letter of undertaking, given to IIB Homeloans on behalf of his named client on 8 April 1999, to return registered title deeds in a timely manner or at all, b) Acted on behalf of his client and his client's parents without advising either party to get independent legal advice, c) Acted in the inter-family transfer without ever meeting or taking instructions from his client's parents, who were transferring their interest to their son, d) Failed to respond to the Society's letter of 12 June 2008 in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland or any person appearing before them as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

James O'Neill

Lindos, Mount Venus Road, Rathfarnham, Dublin 16

24 February 2009

In the matter of James O'Neill, a solicitor of Lindos, Mount Venus Road, Rathfarnham, Dublin 14, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [2586/DT99/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) James O'Neill (respondent solicitor) On 24 February 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: i) Failed to comply with an undertaking that he furnished to the complainant on 25 February 2004 in a timely manner or at all, ii) Furnished a letter of undertaking dated 25 February 2004 to the complainant at a time when he did not have a current practising certificate and had indicated to the Society that he had retired from practice on 31 December 2003 The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: Do stand censured, Pay the whole of the costs and expenses of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

James P Murphy

Doire, Ballygaddy Road, Tuam, Co Galway

7 April 2008

In the matter of James P Murphy, a solicitor of Doire, Ballygaddy Road, Tuam, Co Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3438/DT36/07 and High Court record no 2008 no 17SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) James P Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 17 January 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Misappropriated money received from clients when he was in the employment of a named firm of solicitors, b) Admitted that he had received and retained €77,150, received in all but one case in cash from clients on foot of costs, which monies were retained by the respondent solicitor and never put through the books of named firms of solicitors, c) Failed to disclose the full extent of his misappropriation when originally requested to do so, having only disclosed a misappropriation of €43,400 after his dismissal from a named firm of solicitors, d) Took instructions in relation to a will, a power of attorney and enduring power of attorney from a named elderly man in a nursing home, who could not speak or write, in circumstances where there was evidence that the potential beneficiary had made two previous attempts to gain control over the man's money and had failed in circumstances where it was not appropriate to take such instructions, e) The respondent solicitor, based on information obtained from clients, received and misappropriated €104,885 as of 30 May 2006, although the respondent solicitor only admitted that he had received and retained €77,150 in total The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal recommended to the High Court that the name of the respondent solicitor should be struck off the Roll of Solicitors On Monday 7 April 2008, the President of the High Court ordered, pursuant to the Solicitors Acts, that the respondent solicitor shall be suspended from practising as a solicitor until further order

James P O'Neill

Lindos, Mount Venus Road, Rathfarnham, Dublin 16

6 May 2004

In the matter of James P O'Neill, solicitor, carrying on practice at Lindos, Mount Venus Road, Rathfarnham, Dublin 16, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [2586/DT408] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) James P O'Neill (respondent solicitor) On 6 May 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to respond to the society's correspondence and in particular letters of 27 March 2002, 2 May 2002, 17 May 2002, 17 June 2002, 31 July 2002, 19 August 2002, 27 November 2002, 5 December 2002, 6 January 2003, 30 January 2003, 20 February 2003 and 27 March 2003 in a timely manner or at all b) Failed to comply with the notice served on him pursuant to section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act,1994 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Is hereby censured b) Pay a sum of €2,500 in respect of each of the findings of misconduct, that is, €5,000 c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

James P O'Neill

Lindos, Mount Venus Road, Rathfarnham, Dublin 16

3 October 2006

In the matter of James P O'Neill, a solicitor of Lindos, Mount Venus Road, Rathfarnham, Dublin 14, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [2586/DT79/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) James P O'Neill (respondent solicitor) On 3 October 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct as a solicitor in that he is in breach of the provisions of the Professional Indemnity Insurance Regulations and, in particular, the provision of statutory instrument number 312 of 1995, as amended by statutory instrument number 362 of 1999, having failed to obtain run-off cover for the year 2005 in accordance with the requirements of those regulations The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor do stand censured

Joan Quinn

Quinn & Co Solicitors, at 23A The Village Green, Tallaght, Dublin 24

12 October 2009

In the matter of Joan Quinn, a solicitor formerly practising as Quinn & Co Solicitors, at 23A The Village Green, Tallaght, Dublin 24, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [6646/DT25/09 and High Court Record 2009 no 82 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joan Quinn (respondent solicitor) On 9 June 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Caused and allowed a deficit on the client account to arise in the sum of €918,060 as at 4 February 2008, b) Permitted a deficit on the client account to arise due to unallocated transfers to office account of €722,263 and caused and allowed a debit balance in the sum of €195,797, c) Caused claims in the sum of €937,57633 to be paid from the compensation fund, d) Caused a net sum of €303,076, after taking account of recoveries of €634,500, to be paid from the compensation fund, e) Caused and permitted transfers from client account to office account without there being any valid reason or invoice to transfer the said money, and in doing so breached regulation 7(i)(ii) and regulation 7(i)(iii), f) Permitted a debit balance to arise on the estate of a deceased named client of €195,797, in breach of regulation 7(2), g) Caused a debit balance to appear on the estate of a deceased named client by paying out two cheques in the sum of €225,000 each to an executor, h) Caused and permitted fees, not invoiced, to be held in the client account amounting to the sum of €255,038, which were originally not invoiced and posted to the books of account, in breach of regulation 5(2)(c) The tribunal directed: i) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, ii) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 12 October 2009, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) The court made no order as to the costs of the proceedings herein

John A McDonough

McDonough and Breen, Solicitors, Distillery House, Distillery Lane, Dundalk, Co Louth

25 November 2008

In the matter of John A McDonough, solicitor, practising as McDonough & Breen, Solicitors, Distillery House, Distillery Lane, Dundalk, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John A McDonough (respondent solicitor) On 25 November 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with the complainant's letter dated 10 March 2005 to provide certain items and to hold monies on trust until these items were resolved, b) Failed to adequately respond to the complainant's letters dated 10 March 2005, 24 May 2005, 31 May 2005, 21 June 2005, 21 July 2005, 25 July 2005, 19 September 2005, 6 October 2005, 21 August 2006, 6 November 2006 and 9 January 2007 respectively, c) Failed to respond adequately to the Society's correspondence during the course of this investigation, resulting in the respondent solicitor paying a contribution of €500 towards the costs of the Society's investigation, d) Failed to reply adequately to all of the outstanding matters raised in the complainant's letter to him, dated 15 August 2007 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, or of any person appearing before them, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

John A O'Connell

Nuala G Liston & Co 8 Day Place, Tralee, Co Kerry

25 November 2003

In the matter of John A O'Connell, solicitor, who carries on practice in the firm of Nuala G Liston & Co at 8 Day Place, Tralee, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [6467/DT383] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John A O'Connell (respondent solicitor) On 25 November 2003, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to apply for a practising certificate for the year 2003 in a timely manner, having only applied for same on 10 March 2003 b) Practised as a solicitor without a practising certificate for the period 1 January 2003 to 10 March 2003 in breach of the provisions of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor do stand censured

John B Harte

James Harte & Son, 39 Parliament Street, Kilkenny

28 September 2004

In the matter of John B Harte, solicitor, practising under the style and title of James Harte & Son, 39 Parliament Street, Kilkenny, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [2259/DT398] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John B Harte (respondent solicitor) On 28 September 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in that he had: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to a named solicitor's firm on 22 October 1996 to have a defunct public right of way to a well removed as a burden from a Land Registry folio in a timely manner or at all b) Failed to respond to 13 letters from the complainants to him prior to their making a complaint to the society c) Failed to respond to correspondence from the society in the investigation of the complaint in a timely manner or at all, and in particular failed to reply to letters from the society dated 12 April 2002, 24 April 2002, 7 May 2002, 22 May 2002, 26 June 2002, 3 July 2002, 15 July 2002, 25 July 2002, 7 November 2002, 13 February 2003 d) Failed to attend at Registrar's Committee meetings despite being requested to do so and in particular the meetings of 11 June 2002, 24 September 2002 and 5 November 2002 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

John B Harte

James Harte & Son, 39 Parliament Street, Kilkenny

7 December 2004

In the matter of John B Harte, solicitor, practising under the style and title of James Harte & Son, 39 Parliament Street, Kilkenny, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [2259/DT399/03] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John B Harte (respondent solicitor) On 7 December 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in that he had: a) Failed to respond in a timely manner to the complainants' correspondence in relation to the delay in closing the sale b) Failed to respond to the complainants' enquiries as to the whereabouts of the purchase monies c) Failed to respond to the society's specific enquiry as to whether or not he held the purchase monies on deposit receipt and to detail interest accrued thereon d) Failed to reply to letters from the society and in particular the society's letters of 7 November 2002, 19 November 2002, 2 December 2002 and 21 February 2003 e) Failed to attend at the Registrar's Committee meeting on 18 February 2003 and on 25 March 2003, despite being requested to do so The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: i) Do stand censured ii) Pay a sum of €6,000 to the compensation fund iii) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland and of any person appearing before the tribunal, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

John B Harte

James Harte & Son, 39 Parliament Street, Kilkenny

15 September 2009

In the matter of John B Harte, a solicitor carrying on practice as a partner in the firm of James Harte & Son, Solicitors, at 39 Parliament Street, Kilkenny, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [2259/DT53/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John B Harte (respondent solicitor) On 15 September 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Delayed in complying with an undertaking given to National Irish Bank and dated 16 November 2006 in respect of named properties in a timely manner, having only complied with same in April 2009, b) Failed to reply to the Society's correspondence, and in particular to the Society's letters of 6 May 2008, 25 June 2008, 7 July 2008, 11 August 2008, 27 August 2008, 28 October 2008 in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €7,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

John B McGlynn

11 Castle Street, Athlone, Co Westmeath

16 February 2009

In the matter of John B McGlynn, a solicitor formerly carrying on practice as John McGlynn & Company at 11 Castle Street, Athlone, Co Westmeath, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [7068/DT90/07 and High Court record no 2009 no 5 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John B McGlynn (respondent solicitor) On 21 October 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to extract a grant of probate to the estate of a named client and did not gather in liquid assets of approximately IRε£100,000, b) Misappropriated clients' money from three other clients' ledger accounts, including IRε£60,000 from one of the three ledger accounts, to pay the beneficiaries of the estate of a named client, c) Misappropriated clients' money of €4,000 from the ledger account of a named client and used the money to make a payment for another client, d) Misappropriated two client account cheques for a total of either €3,000 or €5,000 for his own personal purposes and caused the cheques to be debited to the clients' ledger account of a named client, e) Misappropriated IRε£50,000 for his own personal use out of IRε£120,000 received for a named client, f) Misappropriated €106,70356 from the clients' ledger account of a named client to discharge the mortgage of another named client, after having previously misappropriated the money that should have been used to discharge the mortgage, g) Falsely entered on the cheque stub for the above cheque for €106,70356 that the payment related to a named client, which caused the bookkeeper to make a false entry in the books of account, h) Misappropriated €30,000, €3,723 and €5,500 from the clients' ledger account of a named client, i) Falsely entered on the cheque stubs for the above three cheques that the payments related to a named client, which caused the bookkeeper to make three false entries in the books of account, j) Falsely entered on a client account lodgement stub that the sum of €65,000 was received for a named client, when it was actually received for another named client, which caused the bookkeeper to make a false entry in the books of account, k) Caused a debit balance of €15,48470 on the clients' ledger account of a named client because he had previously misappropriated the named client's money, l) Failed to discharge the mortgage on a named client's property because he was unable to do so, as he had previously misappropriated the named client's money, m) Misappropriated €5,000 or €6,000 from an estate and used the money to buy things for his new house, n) Misappropriated the amounts of IRε£20,000 and €1,200 received from clients to pay stamp duty, o) Obtained €100,000 from a named client after telling him untruthfully that there was an investment opportunity that would earn 30% after six months; he then misappropriated €92,500 of the €100,000, p) Untruthfully represented to his former solicitor partner in a named firm of solicitors and his reporting accountant that the €100,000 obtained from a named client was a loan to him (the respondent solicitor) from the named client; this caused his reporting accountant in his report dated 28 June 2005 to understate the deficit in client monies by €100,000, q) Misappropriated €100,000 from the clients' ledger account of a named client; he paid the €100,000 to his brother, r) Obtained a total of €100,000 from a named client and another named client on the false pretence that the money would be invested in a building development for a return of 30% or 35%, and he then used the money to reimburse the clients' ledger account of another named client, s) Concealed his misappropriations of clients' moneys through a system of systematic teeming and lading in the books of account of a named firm of solicitors and another named firm of solicitors, t) Failed to keep books of account while in sole practice, u) Left deficits totalling €166,278 on four files when he left a named firm of solicitors, v) Left deficits totalling €484,533 on various files when he left another named firm of solicitors, €63,500 of which was carried forward from the practice of another named firm of solicitors, w) Created a deficit of €147,051 in the client account of John McGlynn & Co €128,655 of which was created when he paid that amount to clear part of the deficit in his previous practice, x) Obtained a total of €185,000, to clear part of the deficit in a named firm of solicitors, from two relatives and a named client by stating to his relatives that he had "financial commitments on leaving the practice" of the same named firm of solicitors and he informed the same named client that he needed the money to set up in practice, y) Gave a loan of €12,000 to a named client from a client account, which was a personal loan and was not authorised by the client whose ledger account was debited with the payment, z) A number of times failed to make a full disclosure when given the opportunity to do so The tribunal recommended that: a) The respondent solicitor is not a fit and proper person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, and b) His name be struck off the Roll of Solicitors The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 16 February 2009, the President of the High Court ordered that: 1) The respondent solicitor is not a fit and proper person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, 2) The name of the respondent solicitor be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 3) The Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

John BK Lindsay

Lindsay & Company, Solicitors, 47 Wellington Quay, Dublin 2

30 June 2009

In the matter of John BK Lindsay, a solicitor formerly practising as Lindsay & Company, Solicitors, at 47 Wellington Quay, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [3483/DT/116/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John BK Lindsay (respondent solicitor) On 30 June 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor, John BK Lindsay, guilty of misconduct in that he had: a) Failed to comply with a direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee made on 16 April 2008 up to the date of the swearing of the Society's grounding affidavit (on 27 November 2008), b) Failed to respond to multiple correspondence from the Society, c) Through his lack of cooperation with the Society's investigation of the complaint, effectively frustrated the Society in resolving the matter, d) Breached section 68(1) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 in failing to provide the information prescribed by the section, e) Failed to reply to queries about the administration of an estate The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witnesses' expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

John BK Lindsay

Lindsay & Company, Solicitors, 47 Wellington Quay, Dublin 2

30 June 2009

In the matter of John BK Lindsay, a solicitor formerly practising as Lindsay & Company, Solicitors, at 47 Wellington Quay, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John BK Lindsay (respondent solicitor) On 30 June 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor, John BK Lindsay, guilty of misconduct in that he: 1) Was in serious delay in the administration of an estate, 2) Failed to respond to numerous letters from the Society, 3) Failed to provide progress reports to the Society as directed by the committee, 4) Failed in particular to provide a progress report as specifically directed by the committee on or before 10 January 2004, 5) Breached his undertaking given to the committee on 24 March 2004 to furnish a response within 14 days, 6) Failed to attend the meeting of the committee on 28 April 2004, 7) Failed to attend the meeting of the committee on 26 September 2007 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €7,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witnesses' expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

John BK Lindsay

Lindsay & Company, Solicitors, 47 Wellington Quay, Dublin 2

24 November 2010

In the matter of John BK Lindsay, a solicitor formerly practising as Lindsay & Company, Solicitors, at 47 Wellington Quay, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [3483/DT32/10] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John BK Lindsay (respondent solicitor) On 24 November 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: 1) Failed to respond to multiple letters from the Society, 2) Through his conduct, showed a disregard for the responsibilities associated with practice as a solicitor The tribunal made an order: a) Admonishing and advising the respondent solicitor, b) Ordering the respondent solicitor to pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Ordering the respondent solicitor to pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society, including witness expenses, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement And the tribunal took into account the following finding(s) of misconduct on the part of the respondent solicitor previously made by them and not rescinded by the High Court, namely: - Order of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal made on 30 June 2009 (record no 3483/DT66/08), - Order of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal made on 30 June 2009 (record no 3483/DT116/08)

John D Devane

John Devane, Solicitor, 7 Quinlan Street, The Crescent, Limerick

12 June 2008

In the matter of John D Devane, solicitor, practising as John Devane, Solicitor, 7 Quinlan Street, The Crescent, Limerick, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [7909/DT79/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John D Devane (respondent solicitor) On 12 June 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Misrepresented the position of the complainant's action during the course of a meeting with the complainant on 11 May 2005, thus causing the complainant to inadvertently misrepresent the position to the Society in a letter dated 21 June 2005 b) Misrepresented to the Society, in a letter dated 24 August 2005, that matters concerning the complainant had now been satisfactorily resolved c) Misrepresented to the Society, in a letter dated 5 October 2005, that he was endeavouring to secure a conclusion to the matter and hoped to do so prior to Christmas 2005, where in fact he was not Furthermore, he misrepresented that, if the matter did not settle within that period of time, the latest time for settlement would be in the following term d) Provided the complainant with false and/or misleading information, as evidenced in her letter to the Society dated 21 June 2005, by representing to her that the action was being progressed and would either be settled within eight weeks of that date or, failing this, would be heard in court by October 2005 or as soon as possible thereafter e) Failed to provide any adequate response to the Society's inquiries during this investigation and, in particular, failed to respond properly or at all to the Society's letters of 13 March 2006, 27 April 2006, 25 May 2006 and 17 July 2006 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €15,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

John Duffy

John Duffy & Co Solicitors, Main Street, Monasterevin, Co Kildare

12 October 2009

In the matter of John Duffy, a solicitor formerly practising as John Duffy & Co Solicitors, at Main Street, Monasterevin, Co Kildare, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [7660/DT01/09 and High Court record 2009 no 87 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John Duffy (respondent solicitor) On 17 June 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Falsely represented by letter dated 19 February 2007 that a deposit of €7 million had been paid on behalf of a named client to the respondent solicitor to act as a deposit for the sale of the shares in a named limited liability company to the above-mentioned named client in circumstances where no such sum was in fact paid by the named client, b) Falsely represented by letter dated 19 February 2007 that a deposit of €7 million had been paid on behalf of a named client to the respondent solicitor to act as a deposit for the sale of the shares in a named limited liability company to the above-mentioned named client in circumstances where no such sum was in fact paid by the named client and in circumstances where that letter was furnished as security to a named third-party financial institution in order to secure a loan for a named limited liability company in the sum of €8825 million, c) Falsely represented to a named third-party financial institution by email dated 19 July 2007 that he had served a notice on a named client threatening to forfeit the deposit if the sale was not closed by return in circumstances where he had not served such a notice, d) Falsely represented, by implication, to a named third-party financial institution by email dated 19 July 2007 that he continued to hold a deposit in the sum of €7 million that had been paid on behalf of a named client to the respondent solicitor to act as a deposit for the sale of the shares in a named limited liability company to the above-mentioned named client in circumstances where no such sum was in fact paid by the named client, e) Falsely represented, by implication, to a named third-party financial institution by email dated 7 November 2007 that he continued to hold a deposit in the sum of €7 million that had been paid on behalf of a named client to the respondent solicitor to act as a deposit for the sale of the shares in a named limited liability company to the above-mentioned named client in circumstances where no such sum was in fact paid by the named client, f) Falsely represented to a named firm of solicitors, solicitors for a named third-party financial institution, by letter dated 13 November 2007, that he continued to hold a deposit in the sum of €7 million that had been paid on behalf of a named client to the respondent solicitor to act as a deposit for the sale of the shares in a named limited liability company to the above-mentioned named client in circumstances where no such sum was in fact paid by the named client, g) Falsely represented to another named firm of solicitors, solicitors for the receiver, by telephone conversation dated 31 January 2008, that he continued to hold a deposit in the sum of €7 million in his client account, which had been paid on behalf of the same named client to the respondent solicitor to act as a deposit for the sale of the shares in a named limited liability company to the above-mentioned named client in circumstances where he did not hold such funds The tribunal directed that: i) The respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, ii) The name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, iii) The respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witnesses' expenses, to be taxed in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 12 October 2009, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, 2) That the name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 3) That the Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal to include witness expenses as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

John F Condon

McMahon & Tweedy Solicitors, Merchant's House, 27-30 Merchant's Quay, Dublin 8

18 May 2010

In the matter of John F Condon, a solicitor practising as McMahon & Tweedy Solicitors, Merchant's House, 27-30 Merchant's Quay, Dublin 8, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2008 [3127/DT/100/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John F Condon (respondent solicitor) On 18 May 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to the complainants on 18 December 2006 in a timely manner, having only finally complied with same on 20 May 2009, b) Failed to respond adequately or at all to correspondence from the Society in the investigation of the complaint and, in particular, the Society's letters of 19 December 2007, 18 January 2008, 1 April 2008 and 23 June 2008 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €3,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

John Fetherstonhaugh

Fetherstonhaugh Solicitors, Patrick Street, Mountmellick, Co Laois

22 November 2007

In the matter of John Fetherstonhaugh, a solicitor practising as Fetherstonhaugh Solicitors, Patrick Street, Mountmellick, Co Laois, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3270/DT07/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John Fetherstonhaugh (respondent solicitor) On 22 November 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 28 February 2006 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI 421 of 2001), in a timely manner or at all, b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligations to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

John G Casey

Casey & Company Solicitors, North Main Street, Bandon, Co Cork

13 October 2005

In the matter of John G Casey, a solicitor practising as Casey & Company Solicitors at North Main Street, Bandon, Co Cork, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 [5355/DT482/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John G Casey (respondent solicitor) On 13 October 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to advise a named complainant that the notice of appeal served on the complainant on behalf of his client on 24 October 2003 had in fact not been filed and could not be filed; b) Despite this and having received a letter from the named complainant's office on 6 November 2003 requesting him to withdraw the appeal, the solicitor still did not advise the named complainant that the appeal had not been successfully filed and failed to respond to his letter; c) Despite having received the notice of motion and support papers by registered post on 19 November 2003, the solicitor made no attempt to advise the named complainant of his failure to have his notice of appeal filed The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor i) Do stand censured, ii) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland (including the complainant's expenses of attending the tribunal) as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement


John J Kilraine

Kilraine & Company, Nile Lodge Corner, Galway, Co Galway

22 May 2007

In the matter of John J Kilraine, a solicitor practising as Kilraine & Company, Nile Lodge Corner, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6868/DT85/06] Law Society Of Ireland (applicant) John J Kilraine (respondent solicitor) On 22 May 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Was in serious delay in progressing an action on behalf of his client; b) Notwithstanding that the claim arose on 28 February 2000, did not issue proceedings until 27 February 2003; c) Failed to take steps to enter into settlement negotiations when invited to do so by letter dated 18 August 2004 from a solicitor for one of the defendants; d) Failed to enter into settlement negotiations despite repeated assurances given to the Society that he would do so; e) Failed to answer correspondence from the complainant; f) Breached section 68(1) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 for failing, on taking instructions or as soon as practicable thereafter, to provide in writing the information prescribed by the section; g) Failed to inform the solicitors for the defendants that an offer made in October 2001 was not acceptable until February 2004; h) Failed to reply to numerous letters from the Society; i) Failed to provide monthly progress reports on his client's case, as directed by the Complaints and Client Relations Committee at its meeting on 23 March 2005; j) Obstructed the Society by his conduct in carrying out its statutory obligation of investigating complaints The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €6,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

John J Kilraine

Kilraine & Company, Nile Lodge Corner, Galway, Co Galway

12 June 2008

In the matter of John J Kilraine, solicitor, formerly practising as Kilraine & Company at Nile Lodge Corner, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6868/DT87/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John J Kilraine (respondent solicitor) On 12 June 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of professional misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Breached regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (SI no 421 of 2001) in failing to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report covering his financial year ended 28 February 2007 within six months thereafter, that is, by 31 August 2007, b) Failed to attend a meeting of the Regulation of Practice Committee when required to do so on 18 October 2007, c) Through his conduct, showed a disregard for his own statutory obligations and the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients, the solicitors' profession and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

John J Kilraine

Kilraine & Company, Nile Lodge Corner, Galway, Co Galway

12 June 2008

In the matter of John J Kilraine, solicitor, formerly practising as Kilraine & Company at Nile Lodge Corner, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6868/DT88/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John J Kilraine (respondent solicitor) On 12 June 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of professional misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Breached regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (SI no 421 of 2001) in failing to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report covering his financial year ended 28 February 2006 within six months thereafter, that is, by 31 August 2006, b) Through his conduct, showed a disregard for his own statutory obligations and the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients, the solicitors' profession and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

John J Kilraine

Kilraine & Company, Nile Lodge Corner, Galway, Co Galway

4 November 2008

In the matter of John J Kilraine, solicitor, formerly practising as Kilraine & Company at Nile Lodge Corner, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6868/DT58/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John J Kilraine (respondent solicitor) On 4 November 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of professional misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee given on 28 November 2007 that he pay a total contribution of €1,000 towards the costs of the Society for his failure to correspond with the Society in respect of the complaint of a named complainant within one month of being informed of the said direction, having been so informed by letter dated 10 December 2007, and failed to pay the said contribution up to the date of the swearing of the Society's affidavit (on 5 June 2008), b) Failed to reply in a timely manner to the Society's correspondence in respect of the complaint made by the complainant and, in particular, to the Society's letters seeking a response to the complainant's letter of complaint dated 3 September 2007 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the Law Society of Ireland in respect of the sum identified as due and owing to the Society in charge (a) above, d) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

John Kilraine

Kilraine & Company, Nile Lodge Corner, Galway, Co Galway

29 June 2009

In the matter of John Kilraine, a solicitor formerly practising as Kilraine & Company Solicitors, at Nile Lodge Corner, Galway, Co Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [6868/DT89/07 and High Court record no 2009 no 64 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John Kilraine (respondent solicitor) On 4 November 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to prepare CGT returns for two clients after having been paid for doing the work, b) Failed to stamp seven deeds/leases for clients within the requisite time after having been paid for the work, c) Delayed in registering up to 38 deeds/leases for clients over a period from 1997 to 2005 after having been paid for the work, d) Breached regulation 12 of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 by failing to keep books of account written up to date, e) Failing to maintain professional indemnity insurance cover for the period 1 January 2006 to 3 April 2006 in breach of the Professional Indemnity Insurance Regulations, f) Failed to comply with directions of the Regulation of Practice Committee to complete stamping and registration within a specified time, g) Failed to attend a meeting of the Regulation of Practice Committee when asked to attend The tribunal directed that: i) The respondent solicitor should not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership; that he be permitted only to practise as a solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, ii) The respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland to be taxed in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 29 June 2009, the President of the High Court ordered that: 1) The respondent solicitor be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor in the employment of, and under the direct control and supervision of, another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, 2) The Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the cost of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal when taxed and ascertained

John Kilraine

Kilraine & Company, Nile Lodge Corner, Galway, Co Galway

29 June 2009

In the matter of John Kilraine, a solicitor formerly practising as Kilraine & Company, Solicitors, at Nile Lodge Corner, Galway, Co Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [6868/DT56/08 and High Court record no 2009 no 65 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John Kilraine (respondent solicitor) On 4 November 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to progress adequately the complainant's claim in the recovery of his special damages arising out of a road traffic accident claim initially heard at Loughrea District Court on 9 March 2007, b) Failed to pay the balance sum of €500 towards the costs of the Society's investigation, as directed by the Complaints and Client Relations Committee at its meeting held on 28 November 2007, c) Failed to adequately respond to the Society's correspondence and, in particular, letters dated 28 August 2007, 10 September 2007, 20 September 2007, 28 September 2007, 18 October 2007, 14 November 2007, 3 December 2007, 28 January 2008, 4 February 2008 and 23 April 2008, d) Failed to attend the Complaints and Client Relations Committee meeting on 28 November 2007 as required without any adequate explanation, e) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee at its meeting of 23 January 2008 to attend its meeting of 4 March 2008, f) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee at its meeting of 4 March 2008 to attend its meeting of 16 April 2008 The tribunal directed that i) The respondent solicitor should not be permitted topractise as a sole practitioner or in partnership; that he be permitted only to practise as a solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, ii) The respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 29 June 2009, the President of the High Court ordered that: 1) The respondent solicitor be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor in the employment of, and under the direct control and supervision of, another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, 2) The Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the cost of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal when taxed and ascertained

John Martin Carr

William Davis & Company, Solicitors, 74 Old Seamus Quirke Road, Westside Business Park, Galway

30 July 2009

In the matter of John Martin Carr, a solicitor formerly practising in the firm of William Davis & Company, Solicitors, 74 Old Seamus Quirke Road, Westside Business Park, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4214/DT43/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John Martin Carr (respondent solicitor) On 30 July 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: 1) Provided inadequate professional services, chiefly in the form of delay to the complainant, for a period in excess of ten years, 2) Failed to reply to the Society's correspondence and, in particular, letters dated 4 December 2006, 25 January 2007 and 9 March 2007, resulting in a direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee meeting on 18 April 2007 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay the sum of €3,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

John McKenna

Peter J McKenna, 18 Sandymount Green, Dublin 4

24 May 2004

In the matter of John McKenna, solicitor, practising in the firm of Peter J McKenna at 18 Sandymount Green, Dublin 4, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [4544/DT354] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John McKenna (respondent solicitor) On 24 May 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Was in serious delay in registering his client's title to her property b)Was in serious delay in lodging all documentation in relation to his client's conveyancing transaction with his client's building society c) Failed to reply to telephone calls from his client enquiring about the situation d) Failed to reply to correspondence from the society about the matter e) Failed to attend a meeting of the Registrar's Committee when requested to do so f) Misled the Registrar's Committee in a letter dated 30 July 2001 when he represented that he was forwarding the title deeds to his client's building society g) Misled the Registrar's Committee in a further letter dated 19 March 2002 when he represented that he had forwarded his client's title deeds to her building society when he had not h) Failed to comply with a notice pursuant to section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 The tribunal made an order: a) Censuring the respondent solicitor b) Directing the respondent solicitor to pay a sum of €1,500 to the compensation fund c) Directing the respondent solicitor to pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

John McKenna

Peter J McKenna, 18 Sandymount Green, Dublin 4

24 May 2004

In the matter of John McKenna, solicitor, practising in the firm of Peter J McKenna at 18 Sandymount Green, Dublin 4, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [4544/DT355] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John McKenna (respondent solicitor) On 24 May 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to reply to multiple correspondence from his client about the purchase of property b) Failed to reply to multiple correspondence from his client's new solicitor about the above purchase c) Failed to register his client as owner of the property and failed to disclose to him and his new solicitor that he had lost the title documents to the property d) Failed to account to his client for interest accrued on monies held by him on behalf of his client e) Further seriously prejudiced his client in failing to cooperate with the efforts of his client's new solicitor to register his former client's title to the property f) Failed to reply to correspondence and telephone calls from the society about the matter g) Misled the Registrar's Committee on 8 May 2001 when he represented that the purchase deed had been stamped when he knew it had not h) Misled his client's new solicitor in a telephone conversation on 13 February 2001 when he represented that the purchase deed had been stamped i) Further prejudiced his client in exposing him to considerable potential interest penalties arising out of his failure to stamp the purchase deed and his representation that it had been stamped j) Failed to write to his client's new solicitor as requested by the Registrar's Committee on 8 May 2001 to agree a figure for interest k) Falsely represented to his client's new solicitor in a letter dated 29 May 2001 that he was in the process of reconstructing the title to the property when in fact he was doing nothing to remedy the situation l) Failed to comply with a direction of the Registrar's Committee pursuant to section 8(1) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 that he hand his client's file over to his new solicitor m) Failed to co-operate with his client's new solicitor in his efforts to reconstitute the title The tribunal made an order: a) Censuring the respondent solicitor b) Directing the respondent solicitor to pay a sum of €1,500 to the compensation fund c) Directing the respondent solicitor to pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

John W Synnott

John Synnott & Company, Solicitors, Dame House, 24 Dame Street, Dublin 2

3 October 2006

In the matter of John W Synnott, a solicitor carrying on practice under the style and title of John Synnott & Company, Solicitors, at Dame House, 24 Dame Street, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3035/DT40/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John W Synnott (respondent solicitor) On 3 October 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he was in breach of the provisions of section 68(2) of the 1994 Solicitors (Amendment) Act, which states that a solicitor shall not act for a client in connection with any contentious business on the basis of calculating charges on a percentage basis In the circumstances of this case, the solicitor acknowledged and agreed that he had deducted charges from a client's settlement (for personal injuries arising out of a road traffic accident) on the basis of a 10% solicitor/client fee The tribunal ordered thatthe respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

John Whelan

Matthew MacNamara & Son, Solicitors, at Friar Street, Cashel, Co Tipperary

27 April 2006

In the matter of John P Whelan, solicitor, practising as Matthew MacNamara & Son, Solicitors, at Friar Street, Cashel, Co Tipperary, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5513/DT62/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John P Whelan (respondent solicitor) On 27 April 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in respect of the following complaints, as set out in paragraph 15(i) to (viii) inclusive of the affidavit sworn on behalf of the Society on 14 October 2005 as follows: i) Took substantial sums of money as 'solicitor/client' fees in personal injury cases, which were not recorded as income in the office books of account, so that the fee income of the respondent solicitor's practice was substantially understated in the books of account; ii) In most cases, caused two client account cheques to be written, both payable to the client and entered in the books of account as payments to the client, whereas one of the cheques was endorsed by the client, which the respondent solicitor then negotiated for his own use and benefit; iii) Failed to pay VAT on the fees in question or to return the fee income to the Revenue; iv) Provided incorrect information in relation to a number of matters to the investigating accountant in the course of an investigation under the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 on 17 February 2004 and 19 February 2004; v) Failed to disclose the solicitor/client fees to his reporting accountant; vi) Breached section 68(6) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 by failing to furnish to clients a bill as prescribed by the section as soon as practicable after the conclusion of contentious business carried out by him on behalf of the client; vii) Cashed or caused to be cashed 'solicitor/client' fee cheques in the amount of €184,066 over a three and a-half year period, usually in the family butcher shop, instead of paying such fees into the office account; viii) Breached the following regulations of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001: Regulation 12(2)(a): The books of account did not show "the true financial position" in relation to the solicitor/client cheques The books showed the cheques as having been paid to the clients, whereas they were actually fees drawn by the respondent solicitor Regulation 12(1): "Proper books of account" were not maintained when cheques, recorded as having been paid to the clients, were actually paid to the respondent solicitor Regulation 11(1): In none of the personal injury files examined were the clients furnished with a "bill of costs which specifies the amount of the professional fees payable by the client", including outlays Regulation 10(2): The respondent solicitor cashed 'solicitor/client' cheques totalling €76,91063 and a further cheque for €2,500 The respondent solicitor did not pay all moneys received in respect of solicitor/ client fees into the office account Regulation 8(3)(a): The payee details on the solicitor/client cheques recorded the client as the payee, whereas it was in fact the respondent solicitor who received the proceeds of the cheque Regulation 8(2): The solicitor/client cheques were not drawn in favour of the respondent solicitor and were not paid into the office account Regulation 7(3) and 7(1)(a)(iii): In none of the personal injury files examined were the clients furnished with a bill of costs (as defined) Furthermore, the solicitor/client fees drawn were not drawn within a period "not exceeding three months after" furnishing a bill of costs The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €15,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Joseph Fahey

Ballygar Road, Mountbellew, Co Galway

6 November 2007

In the matter of Joseph Fahey, a solicitor of Ballygar Road, Mountbellew, Co Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6687/DT70/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Fahey (respondent solicitor) On 6 November 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking dated 7 November 2003 to ACC Bank to stamp and register the deed of charge and deed of transfer and as soon as practicable to lodge the deeds together with the certificate of title with the bank in respect of a named property in Co Galway on behalf of a named client, b) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence, and in particular the Society's letters of 31 March 2006, 25 April 2006, 5 May 2006 and 19 May 2006, c) Failed to respond to the specific enquiries set out in the Society's letter of 31 March 2006 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €350 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Joseph Fahey

Ballygar Road, Mountbellew, Co Galway

6 November 2007

In the matter of Joseph Fahey, a solicitor of Ballygar Road, Mountbellew, Co Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6687/DT78/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Fahey (respondent solicitor) On 6 November 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Delayed in complying with his undertaking given to the Irish Nationwide Building Society and dated 9 December 2002 in respect of a named property in Co Galway by failing to complete and register the mortgage in favour of the Irish Nationwide Building Society in a timely manner, having only completed same in January 2006, b) Failed to comply with his undertaking dated 9 December 2002 in relation to another named property in Galway, c) Released the proceeds of the sale of the last-mentioned named property in Co Galway without obtaining the consent of the Irish Nationwide Building Society in advance, d) Failed to reply to the Society's correspondence, and in particular the Society's letters of 11 October 2005, 28 October 2005, 17 November 2005, 20 December 2005, 10 January 2006, 6 February 2006, 14 February 2006, 16 March 2006, 29 March 2006, 6 April 2006 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Joseph Fahey

Ballygar Road, Mountbellew, Co Galway

7 April 2008

In the matter of Joseph Fahey, solicitor, of Ballygar Road, Mountbellew, Co Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6687/DT68/06 and High Court record no 2SA 2008] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Fahey (respondent solicitor) On 6 November 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that: a) At the early stages of the investigation, it was not possible to determine the true clients' fund position because the books of account were in arrears The accountant's report for 28 February 2003 showed a deficit of €270,083 as of the reporting date This deficit was mainly caused by debit balances The accountant's report for the year ended 29 February 2004 showed a deficit in client funds of €116,103 at the date, again mainly caused by debit balances The accountant's report for the year ended 28 February 2005 showed a deficit in client account of €64,216 as of the reporting date b) Subject to the matters set out in paragraph 22 of the investigating accountant's report, there was an apparent deficit of €32,687 in the client account as of 31 August 2005 c) Debit balances amounted to €32,687 as of the date of 31 August 2005 d) In June 2004, the books of account were almost two years in arrears Since October 2004, the books were written up by a very competent bookkeeper and at the time of the investigation they were approximately five weeks in arrears e) In a purchase by a named client from a named vendor, the stamp duty amounted to €5,142 Interest and penalties were avoided because the transfer deed was 'updated' to 12 May 2004, although the purchase closed in January 2002 f) In another purchase by the aforementioned named client, it would appear that stamp duty at 9% plus interest and penalty may have been avoided because the deed was 'updated' from on or about 30 October 2001 to 20 November 2002 g) In the course of acting for a named client in relation to a purchase of property, interest and penalty on stamp duty of €7,140 were avoided because the transfer deed was 'updated' from in or about September 2003 to 20 August 2004 h) In the course of acting for a named client in relation to the purchase of a property, interest and penalty on stamp duty of €9,560 were avoided because the transfer deed was 'updated' from 2 February 2004 to 4 April 2005 i) In the course of acting for two named clients in relation to the purchase of one site each, interest and penalty on the stamp duty amounts of €1,125 were avoided because the transfer deeds were 'updated' from in or about August 2004 to 20 April 2005 and 25 August 2005 respectively j) The solicitor acted for a named builder in relation to the sale of new houses, and in six cases he also acted for the purchasers of the houses, in breach of the Solicitors (Professional Practice Conduct and Discipline) Regulations of 1997 (SI no 85 of 1997) The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 7 April 2008, the President of the High Court ordered, pursuant to section 8 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1960, as substituted by section 18 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 and amended by section 9 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 2002: i) That the respondent solicitor should not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership, that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, ii) That the respondent solicitor do deliver to Fair & Murtagh Solicitors all or any documents, files and papers in his possession or within his procurement arising from his practice as a solicitor, including all ledger cards and funds held for and on behalf of clients files, iii) That the Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings in the High Court and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal

Joseph Griffin

Joseph Griffin & Company, Solicitors, 93 O'Connell Street, Limerick

7 March 2006

In the matter of Joseph Griffin, a solicitor practising as Joseph Griffin and Company, Solicitors, 93 O'Connell Street, Limerick, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 [3474/DT13/05] Client in person (applicant) Joseph Griffin (respondent solicitor) On 7 March 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had failed to carry out his client's instructions The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the sum of €11,30850 as restitution to his client, without prejudice to any legal right of his client, d) Pay the expenses of his client and that of his client's witness, measured in the sum of €150

Joseph Griffin

Joseph Griffin & Company, Solicitors, 93 O'Connell Street, Limerick

25 January 2011

In the matter of Joseph Griffin, a solicitor practising as Joseph Griffin & Company, Solicitors, 93 O'Connell Street, Limerick, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [3474/DT98/10] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Griffin (respondent solicitor) On 25 January 2011, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 October 2009 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001), b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligation to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Joseph Traynor

Traynor Mallon Solicitors, 86 Clanbrasil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth

10 June 2004

In the matter of Joseph Traynor, solicitor, and Seamus Mallon, solicitor, practising as Traynor Mallon Solicitors and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [5554-3936/DT417] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Traynor (first-named respondent solicitor) Seamus Mallon (second-named respondent solicitor) On 10 June 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the first-named respondent solicitor and the second-named respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in respect of the following complaints set out in paragraph 14 of the affidavit of Patrick Joseph Connolly, sworn 7 August 2003, in that they: a) Allowed a deficit to arise in respect of client funds as of 30 November 2002 in the sum of €126,167, increasing as of 31 December 2002 to €250,693 b) Allowed this deficit to so arise in the practice of withdrawing costs from the client account in round sum amounts and failing to record these withdrawals in the ledger accounts of the clients concerned in breach of regulation 12(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 c) Failed to keep proper books of account in breach of regulation 12(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, thereby masking the deficit which was not readily apparent from the books of account that were presented to the investigating accountant d) Allowed the client bank account to be overdrawn on a number of occasions, as set out in paragraph 214 of the investigating accountant's report dated 7 February 2003 e) Allowed debit balances on the client ledger to occur on the client ledger account, as set out in the investigating accountant's report dated 7 February 2003 and in particular paragraph 215 to 219 thereof The existence of debit balances on the client ledger is in breach of regulation 7(1) and 7(2) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 The tribunal ordered that: a) The first-named respondent solicitor, Joseph Traynor, and the second-named respondent solicitor, Seamus Mallon, do stand censured b) The first-named respondent solicitor, Joseph Traynor, pay to the compensation fund a sum of €3,000 in respect of each of the charges, that is, a total of €15,000 c) The second-named respondent solicitor, Seamus Mallon, pay to the compensation fund a sum of €1,000 in respect of each of the charges, that is, €5,000 d) The first-named respondent solicitor and the second-named respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Joseph Traynor

Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth

7 May 2010

In the matter of Joseph Traynor, solicitor, formerly practising as Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [5554/DT124/09 and High Court record no 2010 no 57 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Traynor (respondent solicitor) On 18 March 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: 1) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant's clients, Start Mortgages Limited, in respect of his named clients, involving property at Rathcore, Enfield, Co Meath, in the solicitor's undertaking dated 4 March 2008, whereby he undertook to do the following: a) To ensure that the mortgage ranked as the first legal mortgage/charge on the property, b) As soon as practicable, to stamp and register the mortgage in the appropriate registry so as to ensure the lender obtained the first legal mortgage/charge on the property and, expeditiously, as soon as practicable thereafter, to lodge the following with the lender: i) All deeds and documents to the property, stamped and registered as appropriate, including if applicable the assignment of the life policy, stamped collateral to the mortgage, ii) The original mortgage (with certificate of charge endorsed thereon under rule 156 of the Land Registry Rules1972, if Land Registry title), iii) The Land Registry certificate or, if not issued, an up-to-date certified copy folio of the property showing the mortgage registered as a burden thereon, and iv) Certificate of title in the Law Society's standard form 2) Failed to adequately or at all respond to the complainant's correspondence, in particular letters dated 31 August 2008, 28 October 2008, 21 November 2008 and 18 December 2008 respectively The tribunal directed: a) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) That the respondent solicitor pay the sum of €50,000 as restitution to Start Mortgages Limited, d) That the respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 5 July 2010, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) That the respondent solicitor pay the sum of €50,000 as restitution to Start Mortgages Limited, 3) That the applicant forward the papers in respect of this application to the Director of Public Prosecutions, 4) That the respondent solicitor surrender his passport forthwith to An Garda Siochana, 5) That the respondent solicitor pay the applicant the costs of the High Court proceedings, together with the costs of the disciplinary tribunal proceedings, to include witness expenses, to be taxed in default of agreement

Joseph Traynor

Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth

5 July 2010

In the matter of Joseph Traynor, solicitor, formerly practising as Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [5554/DT01/10 and High Court record no 2010 no 56 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Traynor (respondent solicitor) On 11 May 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Caused or allowed a fictitious contract for the purported sum of €7 million in relation to the purchase of lands at Castlewarden, being a false and misleading contract as to the purchase price, as there was an existing contract for the sum of €46 million, b) Caused or allowed a fictitious contract for the purchase of lands at Castlewarden to bear the signature of the vendor and the complainant's signature as witness, when such signatures were not the signatures of the vendor and the complainant, c) Permitted or allowed a fictitious contract to be forwarded to the solicitors for a bank for the purchase of the site the bank placed reliance upon, d) Failed to progress the true contract for the purchase price of €46 million, leaving a capital balance outstanding of €1,140,000 plus interest, which entailed proceedings for specific performance being issued and served by the complainant, e) Failed to have the original deed of transfer signed by the purchaser dated, stamped and registered, f) Failed to explain why €34 million occurred on the client ledger account when he claimed that he had no money to stamp the deed, g) Failed to explain why there were two versions of a contract for the same lands, h) Released title documents held on trust to the order of the complainant pending payment of the full amount of the purchase monies, i) Failed to explain why he had not brought the matter of the fictitious contract and purported fraud to the immediate attention of the gardaεΥ, j) Failed to respond adequately or at all to the complainant's correspondence, in particular letters dated 1 November 2006, 7 November 2006, 11 December 2006, 15 June 2007, 9 August 2007, 22 August 2007, 19 October 2007, 20 December 2007, 13 June 2008, 3 April 2009, 15 April 2009, 22 April 2009 and 27 April 2009, k) Failed to respond adequately or at all to the Society's correspondence, in particular letters dated 20 August 2009 and 21 September 2009 The tribunal directed: a) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) That the respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 5 July 2010, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) That the applicant forward the papers in respect of this application to the Director of Public Prosecutions, 3) That the respondent solicitor surrender his passport forthwith to An Garda Siochana, 4) That the respondent solicitor pay the applicant the costs of the High Court proceedings, together with the costs of the disciplinary tribunal proceedings, to include witness expenses, to be taxed in default of agreement

Joseph Traynor

Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth

5 July 2010

In the matter of Joseph Traynor, solicitor, formerly practising as Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [5554/DT102/09 and High Court record no 2010 no 53 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Traynor (respondent solicitor) On 26 January 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed, up to the date of referral to this tribunal, in a timely manner or at all, to honour an undertaking given to the complainant by letter dated 22 February 2008, whereby he failed to discharge the mortgage on title in favour of ACC Bank plc from the proceeds of sale of property at Tullydonnell, Ardee, Co Louth, and to furnish a mortgage vacate of the said mortgage, together with a cheque in the sum of €25, in respect of Land Registry fees as soon as possible thereafter The tribunal directed: a) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) That the respondent solicitor pay a monetary penalty of €800,000, d) That the respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal urged that the papers in respect of this application be forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecutions The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 5 July 2010, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) That the respondent solicitor pay the sum of €800,000 as restitution to a named client, 3) That the applicant forward the papers in respect of this application to the Director of Public Prosecutions, 4) That the respondent solicitor surrender his passport forthwith to An Garda Siochana, 5) That the respondent solicitor pay the applicant the costs of the High Court proceedings, together with the costs of the disciplinary tribunal proceedings, to include witness expenses, to be taxed in default of agreement


Joseph Traynor

Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth

5 July 2010

In the matter of Joseph Traynor, solicitor, formerly practising as Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [5554/DT11/10 and High Court record no 2010 no 55 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Traynor (respondent solicitor) On 11 May 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant on behalf of a named client for property at Lislin, Mullagh, Co Cavan, dated 31 August 2007, in which he undertook to register the mortgage of the complainant in the appropriate registry and to ensure that the lender/complainant obtained a first legal mortgage on the property and, as soon as practical thereafter, to lodge with the lender/complainant all deeds and documents properly stamped and registered as appropriate together with the original mortgage, b) Failed to reply adequately to the complainant's correspondence and to the complainant's solicitors' correspondence, in particular letters dated 9 December 2008, 9 January 2009, 28 January 2009, 16 February 2009 and 26 February 2009, c) Failed to adequately respond to the Society's correspondence, in particular letters dated 5 May 2009 and 20 May 2009, d) Failed to attend or arrange representation before the Complaints and Client Relations Committee meeting on 9 October 2009, despite being directed to attend The tribunal directed: a) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) That the respondent solicitor pay the sum of €570,000 as restitution to Start Mortgages, d) That the respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 5 July 2010, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) That the respondent solicitor pay the sum of €570,000 as restitution to Start Mortgages Limited, 3) That the applicant forward the papers in respect of this application to the Director of Public Prosecutions, 4) That the respondent solicitor surrender his passport forthwith to An Garda Siochana, 5) That the respondent solicitor pay the applicant the costs of the High Court proceedings, together with the costs of the disciplinary tribunal proceedings, to include witness expenses, to be taxed in default of agreement

Joseph Traynor

Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth

5 July 2010

In the matter of Joseph Traynor, solicitor, formerly practising as Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [5554/DT125/09 and High Court record no 2010 no 58 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Traynor (respondent solicitor) On 18 March 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant, dated 17 November 2004, whereby he undertook to do the following: 1) Execute security documents in that, prior to negotiating the loan cheque or the proceeds thereof, he failed to ensure that the borrower had executed a mortgage deed/charge in the lender's standard form as produced by the lender over the property, 2) Ensure that the mortgage ranked as a first legal mortgage/charge on the property, 3) Register the mortgage in the appropriate registry so as to ensure that the lender/complainant obtained a first legal mortgage/charge on the property and, expeditiously, as soon as practicable thereafter, to lodge the following documents with the lender/complainant: i) All deeds and documents to the property, stamped and registered as appropriate, including, if applicable, the assignment of the life policy, stamped collateral to the mortgage, ii) The original mortgage (with certificate of charge endorsed thereon under rule 156 of the Land Registry Rules 1972, if Land Registry title), iii) If Land Registry title, the land certificate or, if not issued, an up-to-date certified copy folio of the property showing the mortgage registered as a burden thereon, iv) The complainant's certificate of title in the Law Society's standard form 4) Hold all title documents of the property in trust for the lender/complainant b) Failed to adequately or at all respond to the complainant's correspondence, in particular letters dated 18 July 2008, 6 October 2008 (twice), 22 October 2008, 7 January 2009, 9 January 2009 and 6 February 2009, c) Failed to adequately respond to the Society's correspondence, in particular letters dated 23 February 2009, 11 March 2009, 19 March 2009, 1 April 2009 and 3 June 2009 respectively The tribunal directed: a) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) That the respondent solicitor pay the sum of €45,27594 to KBC Mortgages Limited, d) That the respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 5 July 2010, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) That the respondent solicitor pay the sum of €45,27594 as restitution to KBC Homeloans Limited, 3) That the applicant forward the papers in respect of this application to the Director of Public Prosecutions, 4) That the respondent solicitor surrender his passport forthwith to An Garda Siochana, 5) That the respondent solicitor pay the applicant the costs of the High Court proceedings, together with the costs of the disciplinary tribunal proceedings, to include witness expenses, to be taxed in default of agreement

Joseph Traynor

Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth

5 July 2010

In the matter of Joseph Traynor, solicitor, formerly practising as Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [5554/DT126/09 and High Court record no 2010 no 59 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Traynor (respondent solicitor) On 18 March 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant's clients, Start Mortgages Limited, in respect of his named client, involving property at Rosehill, Mullagh, Co Cavan, in a solicitor's undertaking dated 25 January 2008, whereby he undertook to do the following: i) To register the mortgage in the appropriate registry to ensure that the complainant's clients, Start Mortgages Limited, obtained the first legal charge on the property, ii) To, as soon as practicable thereafter, register the first legal charge on the property and to lodge with the lender, Start Mortgages Limited, all deeds and documents properly stamped and registered, iii) As soon as practicable after registration of Start Mortgages Limited first legal mortgage of the property, to lodge the original mortgage with the lender, Start Mortgages Limited, iv) To ensure the borrowers acquiring the property obtained good marketable title to it or, where the borrower already owned the property, to satisfy himself that such borrower had good marketable title to it b) Failed to adequately or at all respond to the complainant's correspondence, in particular letters dated 9 December 2008, 9 January 2009, 28 January 2009, 16 February 2009 and 26 February 2009 respectively The tribunal directed: a) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) That the respondent solicitor pay restitution in the sum of €180,000 to Start Mortgages, d) That the respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 5 July 2010, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) That the respondent solicitor pay the sum of €180,000 as restitution to Start Mortgages Limited, 3) That the applicant forward the papers in respect of this application to the Director of Public Prosecutions, 4) That the respondent solicitor surrender his passport forthwith to An Garda Siochana, 5) That the respondent solicitor pay the applicant the costs of the High Court proceedings, together with the costs of the disciplinary tribunal proceedings, to include witness expenses, to be taxed in default of agreement

Joseph Traynor

Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth

5 July 2010

In the matter of Joseph Traynor, solicitor, formerly practising as Traynor & Company, Solicitors, 86 Clanbrassil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [5554/DT75/09 and High Court record no 2010 no 54 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Traynor (respondent solicitor) On 26 January 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to honour an undertaking on 25 August 2006 to lodge the title documents relating to lands at Castlewarden, Naas, Co Kildare, immediately upon the sale being completed, b) Failed to honour an undertaking on 29 August 2006 to stamp and register the title documents relating to lands at Castlewarden, Naas, Co Kildare, c) Failed to honour an undertaking on 26 September 2006 to stamp the deed of transfer in respect of the sale of lands at Castlewarden, Naas, Co Kildare, d) Failed to honour an undertaking on 13 February 2007 to stamp the title documents relating to lands at Castlewarden, Naas, Co Kildare, and to arrange to have them lodged in the Land Registry within six weeks from that date, e) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 11 February 2009 to reply to the Society by 1 March 2009 with a copy of the stamped deed, the dealing number and copy correspondence to ACC Bank plc informing them that the deed was stamped The tribunal directed: a) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, b) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, c) That the respondent solicitor pay a monetary penalty of €630,000 to the Revenue Commissioners, d) That the respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement The tribunal urged that the papers in respect of this application be forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecutions The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 5 July 2010, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) That the respondent solicitor pay the sum of €630,000 to ACC Bank plc, who will remit said sum to the Revenue Commissioners if due in respect of stamp duty, or retain if not due, 3) That the applicant forward the papers in respect of this application to the Director of Public Prosecutions, 4) That the respondent solicitor surrender his passport forthwith to An Garda Siochana, 5) That the respondent solicitor pay the applicant the costs of the High Court proceedings, together with the costs of the disciplinary tribunal proceedings, to include witness expenses, to be taxed in default of agreement

Joseph W Fahey

Joseph W Fahey, Ballygar Road, Mountbellew, Ballinasloe, Co Galway

3 February 2005

In the matter of Joseph W Fahey, a solicitor practising as Joseph W Fahey, Ballygar Road, Mountbellew, Ballinasloe, Co Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [6687/DT452/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph W Fahey (respondent solicitor) On 3 February 2005, theSolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had failed to file his accountant's report covering his financial year ended 28 February 2003 with the society, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished b) Pay a sum of €350 to the compensation fund c) Pay the contribution of €650, being part of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland

Joseph W Fahey

Ballygar Road, Mountbellew, Co Galway

23 October 2008

In the matter of W Joseph Fahey, a solicitor of Ballygar Road, Mountbellew, Co Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6687/DT37/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) W Joseph Fahey (respondent solicitor) On 23 October 2008 and 13 November 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Retained at least €3,800 in respect of stamp duty on behalf of a named complainant, but failed to furnish same to the Revenue or to return same to the client in a timely manner, b) Failed to reply to the Society's correspondence and, in particular, the Society's letters of 17 August 2007, 30 August 2007, 7 September 2007, 24 September 2007, 10 October 2007, 19 October 2007, 5 November 2007, c) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee, made at its meeting on 28 November 2007, to respond to the Society's letter of 24 September 2007 within one month, d) Failed to register the named complainant's property in the Land Registry in a timely manner or at all, e) Failed to reply to all the issues raised in a letter from the named complainant dated 7 September 2007 And by reason of the submissions made and the fact that the respondent solicitor has voluntarily agreed to pay the stamp duty (which in the normal course of events would be the responsibility of the client) in addition to the penalty imposed by the Revenue (upwards of €20,000), the tribunal is of the opinion that it is appropriate to make an order pursuant to subsection 9 of section 7 (as substituted by section 17 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 and amended by section 9(d) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 2002) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1960 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Joseph W Fahey

Joseph Fahey & Co Solicitors, Mountbellew, Ballinasloe, Co Galway

16 February 2010

In the matter of Joseph W Fahey, a solicitor previously carrying on practice under the style of Joseph Fahey & Co Solicitors, Mountbellew, Ballinasloe, Co Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [6687/DT67/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph W Fahey (respondent solicitor) On 16 February 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 28 February 2008 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) in a timely manner, b) Failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society a closing accountant's report up to and including the date of cessation of his practice on 4 April 2008 (within six months of that date), in breach of regulation 26(2) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay a contribution of €1,000, being part of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland

Kathryn Monaghan

Kathryn Monaghan & Associates, Tuam Road, Galway

11 December 2009

In the matter of Kathryn Monaghan, a solicitor carrying on practice as Kathryn Monaghan & Associates, Tuam Road, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [8202/DT66/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Kathryn Monaghan (respondent solicitor) On 11 December 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Updated a deed from 17 February 2008 to 8 December 2008, thereby avoiding the question of interest and penalty on stamp duty of €24,600, b) Updated a deed from August 2006 to 18 December 2008, thereby avoiding interest and penalty on stamp duty of €8,750, c) Failed to advise the lender that the entire proceeds of the mortgage was not going to be applied in accordance with the stated purpose set out in the letter of loan sanction in respect of the property identified at paragraph 24(h) and (i) of the investigation report, d) Acted for six clients in relation to the purchase of four investment properties in a development and failed to advise the lender prior to the investigation of her practice that the purchase price informed to the lender was greater than the actual purchase price in respect of each of the properties as set out in paragraphs 25, 26, 27 and 28 of the investigation report, e) Failed to protect the clients' interests in a situation where the lender was misinformed about the true purchase price of the properties, f) Updated the four deeds in respect of four named properties from 22 June 2007 to dates in August and September 2007, thereby avoiding interest and penalties on stamp duty due The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay 50% of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Keith Finnan

Keith Finnan & Company, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo

11 March 2004

In the matter of Keith Finnan, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Keith Finnan & Company at Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [4346/DT397] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Keith Finnan (respondent solicitor) On 11 March 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: Failed to respond to correspondence from the society and in particular to the letters dated 12 November 2002, 26 November 2002, 5 December 2002, 18 December 2002, 5 February 2003 and 24 February 2003 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €250 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society (including witnesses' expenses) as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Keith Finnan

Keith Finnan & Company, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo

12 October 2004

In the matter of Keith Finnan, a solicitor practising as Keith Finnan & Company, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [4346/DT463/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Keith Finnan (respondent solicitor) On 12 October 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in that he had: a) Failed to apply for a practising certificate for the year 2004 in a timely manner, having only applied for same on 31 March 2004 b) Practised as a solicitor without a practising certificate for the period 1 January 2004 to 31 March, in breach of the provisions of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €1,500 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Keith Finnan

Keith Finnan & Company, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo

23 February 2006

In the matter of Keith Finnan, a solicitor practising as Keith Finnan & Company at Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 [4346/DT56/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Keith Finnan (respondent solicitor) On 23 February 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to file his accountant's report for the year ended 31 January 2004, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, statutory instrument no 421 of 2001, in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay a contribution of €500 towards the costs of the Law Society of Ireland

Keith Finnan

Keith Finnan & Company, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo

4 May 2006

In the matter of Keith Finnan, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Keith Finnan & Company at Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 2002 [4346/DT05/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Keith Finnan (respondent solicitor) On 4 May 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 January 2005 within six months of his annual accounting date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001); b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligations to comply with the regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Keith Finnan

Keith Finnan & Company, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo

24 July 2008

In the matter of Keith Finnan, a solicitor practising as Keith Finnan & Company, Solicitors, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4346/DT27/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Keith Finnan (respondent solicitor) On 24 July 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Up to the date of swearing of the Society's affidavit, failed to comply fully with an undertaking given to the complainants on 22 December 2005 in a timely manner, b) Failed to respond to the complainants' correspondence in relation to the undertaking in a timely manner, c) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence, and in particular the Society's letters of 24 July 2006, 4 August 2006, 24 August 2006, 8 November 2006, 4 December 2006, 19 December 2006, 30 January 2007, 8 March 2007, 18 May 2007, 8 June 2007, 2 July 2007, 5 July 2007, 30 July 2007, 13 August 2007, 21 August 2007, 3 September 2007, and 28 September 2007, d) Failed to comply with a notice served pursuant to section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994, which notice was served by registered post on 30 January 2007, in a timely manner, e) Failed to comply with the directions of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee at its meeting on 16 May 2007 to have a progress report filed with the Society on or before 6 June 2007, f) Failed to attend a meeting of the committee on 20 January 2007 despite being required to do so, thereby obliging the Society to apply to the High Court for an order requiring his attendance before the committee The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €1,500 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Keith Finnan

Keith Finnan & Company, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo

9 December 2008

In the matter of Keith Finnan, a solicitor practising as Keith Finnan & Company, Solicitors, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4346/DT53/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Keith Finnan (respondent solicitor) On 9 December 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence, and in particular the Society's letters of 11 September 2007, 24 September 2007, 4 October 2007, 16 October 2007, 7 December 2007, 28 January 2008, 7 February 2008, b) Failed to comply with the directions of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee, made at its meeting on 28 November 2007, to make a contribution of €400 towards the costs of the Society's investigation, c) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee, made at its meeting on 6 February 2008, that he attend the next meeting of the committee on 10 April 2008 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the sum of €3,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Keith Finnan

Keith Finnan & Company, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo

9 December 2008

In the matter of Keith Finnan, a solicitor practising as Keith Finnan & Company, Solicitors, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4346/DT57/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Keith Finnan (respondent solicitor) On 9 December 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Delayed in the discharge of his undertaking to furnish a deed of discharge for a named property, having only furnished same in January 2008, b) Failed to furnish the necessary documentation to the complainant to allow their clients to obtain ownership of named properties in accordance with the terms of the contract dated 23 February 2005 and set out in the complainant's letter of 14 February 2008 in a timely manner or at all, c) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence and, in particular, the Society's letters of 31 July 2007, 13 August 2007, 21 August 2007, 3 September 2007, 1 October 2007, 13 November 2007, 3 December 2007, d) Failed to attend the meetings on 26 September 2007 and 28 November 2007, despite being required to do so, e) Failed to comply with the direction made by the Complaints and Client Relations Committee at its meeting on 28 November 2007 to pay the sum of €450 towards the cost of the investigation The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the sum of €3,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Keith P Finnan

Keith Finnan & Company, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo

14 June 2010

In the matter of Keith P Finnan, a solicitor previously practising as Keith Finnan & Company, Solicitors, Humbert Mall, Main Street, Castlebar, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2008 [4346/DT134/09 and High Court 2010 no 49SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Keith Finnan (respondent solicitor) On 13 April 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society an accountant’s report for the year ended 31 January 2009 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors’ Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001), b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligation to comply with the Solicitors’ Accounts Regulations, and showed disregard for the Society’s statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors’ Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public. The tribunal recommended that the matter be sent forward to the President of the High Court and, on 14 June 2010, the President of the High Court ordered: a) That the respondent solicitor is not permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership, that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor in the employment and under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years’ standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, b) That the Law Society do recover the cost of the proceedings in the High Court and the cost of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, when taxed and ascertained, from the respondent

Kiran P O'Duffy

O'Duffy & Associates, 10 Blessington Street, Dublin 7; subsequently at 37 Brighton Road, Dublin 6

21 November 2006

In the matter of Kiran P O'Duffy, a solicitor previously practising as principal of O'Duffy & Associates, 10 Blessington Street, Dublin 7, and now at 37 Brighton Road, Dublin 6, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3510/DT48/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Kiran P O'Duffy (respondent solicitor) On 21 November 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Allowed a deficit in client monies as of 28 April 2004, estimated at €186,053, to arise; b) Permitted the existence of debit balances in 20 client ledger accounts, that is to say, where money in excess of monies held to the credit of those clients, in the amount of €186,053, had been withdrawn; c) The largest debit balance was recorded in a client ledger account titled 'KODUNREFERENCED', where a debit balance of €173,685 was in existence at 28 April 2004; d) On various dates between 8 January 2004 and 16 April 2004, the solicitor made 13 separate client cheque payments from the client to the office account, totalling €175,685, which were debited to the client ledger account titled 'KODUNREFERENCED'; e) Debit balances were created on numerous occasions when monies were taken from the client account to office account, apparently in anticipation of fees but before fees were received; f) Allowed the existence of such debit balances, which is in breach of regulation 7(2) of the regulations; g) Allowed a credit balance of €177,959 on the office side of the client ledger account 'KODUNREFERENCED',in breach of regulation 10(5) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €7,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Linda McEvoy

Linda McEvoy, Solicitor, DMG Business Centre, 12 Camden Row, Dublin 8

20 July 2010

In the matter of Linda McEvoy, a solicitor previously practising as Linda McEvoy, Solicitor, DMG Business Centre, 12 Camden Row, Dublin 8, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2008 [8576/DT118/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Linda McEvoy (respondent solicitor) On 20 July 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2008 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a contribution to the costs of the Law Society measured at €250

Lorna J Burke

Burke & Company, Prospect House, Prospect Hill, Galway

20 November 2003

In the matter of Lorna J Burke, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Burke & Company, Prospect House, Prospect Hill, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [3166/DT259] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Lorna J Burke (respondent solicitor) On 20 November 2003, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Failed to reply to multiple correspondence from the society arising from a complaint b) Failed to attend a meeting of the Registrar's Committee when requested to do so c) Through her conduct obstructed and frustrated the society in carrying out its statutory duty to investigate complaints d) Through her conduct showed a flagrant disregard for the society's position as the statutory regulatory authority of the solicitors' profession e) Failed to comply with a notice served on her pursuant to section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 within the time prescribed by the act f) Failed to comply with the direction of the Registrar's Committee that she refund to an estate her professional fee g) Failed to reply to telephone calls and correspondence from the complainant seeking information about his registration of lands inherited by him under the will of a relative The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €2,500 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland and of any person appearing before them as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Lorna J Burke

Burke & Company, Prospect House, Prospect Hill, Galway

20 November 2003

In the matter of Lorna J Burke, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Burke & Company, Prospect House, Prospect Hill, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [3166/DT263] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Lorna J Burke (respondent solicitor) On 20 November 2003, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Failed to reply to multiple correspondence from the society arising from a complaint b) Failed to attend a meeting of the Registrar's Committee when requested to do so c) Through her conduct, obstructed and frustrated the society in carrying out its statutory duty to investigate complaints d) Through her conduct, showed a flagrant disregard for the society's position as the statutory regulatory authority of the solicitors' profession e) Through her failure to carry out her client's instructions seriously prejudiced her client's interests The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €2,500 to the compensation fund c) Pay a sum of €3,000 as restitution to the complainant without prejudice to any legal right of the complainant d) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland or any person appearing before them as taxed by the taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement


Lorna J Burke

Burke & Company, Solicitors, Top Floor, Prospect House, Prospect Hill, Galway

30 July 2007

In the matter of Lorna J Burke, a solicitor practising as Burke & Company, Solicitors, Top Floor, Prospect House, Prospect Hill, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3166/4/DT94/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Lorna J Burke (respondent solicitor) On 30 July 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Breached regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, SI no 421 of 2001, in failing to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report covering her financial year ended 31 March 2005 within six months thereafter, that is, by 30 September 2005; b) Failed to attend a meeting of the Compensation Fund Committee, now the Regulation of Practice Committee, when required to do so on 8 December 2005, arising out of her failure to file the outstanding accountant's report; c) Breached regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, SI no 421 of 2001, in failing to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report covering her financial year ended 31 March 2006 within six months thereafter, that is, by 30 September 2006; d) Through her conduct, showed a disregard for her own statutory obligations and the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients, the solicitors' profession and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Margaret Am Casey

Casey & Company Solicitors, North Main Street, Bandon, Co Cork

17 April 2008

In the matter of Margaret AM Casey, solicitor, practising as Casey & Company Solicitors at North Main Street, Bandon, Co Cork, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [8372/DT60/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Margaret AM Casey (respondent solicitor) On 17 April 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Breached regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (SI no 421 of 2001) in failing to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report covering her financial year ended 31 December 2005 within six months thereafter, that is, by 30 June 2006, b) Through her conduct, showed a disregard for her own statutory obligations and the Society's statutory obligations to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients, the solicitors' profession and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Margaret Am Casey

Casey & Co Solicitors at North Main Street, Bandon, Co Cork

30 March 2010

In the matter of Margaret AM (otherwise Mairead) Casey, practising as Casey & Co Solicitors at North Main Street, Bandon, Co Cork, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [8372/DT121/2009] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Margaret AM (otherwise Mairead) Casey (respondent solicitor) On 30 March 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Up to the date of swearing of the affidavit of the Society on 23 November 2009, failed to comply with her assurance given to the Society by letter dated 21 July 2009 that she would send the complainant's file directly to the complainant's new solicitors, b) Failed to reply to the Society's letters dated 8 June 2009, 22 June 2009, 23 July 2009, 6 August 2009 and 21 August 2009, c) Failed to attend or arrange to be represented at the meeting of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 15 September 2009, despite having been notified by letter dated 7 September 2009 that she was required to attend the said meeting or to arrange representation, d) Showed scant regard for the Society's statutory obligation to investigate complaints, e) Through her conduct, effectively prevented the Society from resolving the matter, f) Showed a complete disregard for her former client the complainant The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay 50% of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Margaret Casey

Casey & Company Solicitors, North Main Street, Bandon, Co Cork

29 September 2010

In the matter of Margaret (otherwise Mairead) Casey, a solicitor practising as Casey & Company, Solicitors, at North Main Street, Bandon, Co Cork, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [8372/DT26/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Margaret Casey (respondent solicitor) On 29 September 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Up to the date of the swearing of the Society's affidavit (on 20 March 2009), failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee given on 1 April 2008, arising from her failure to reply to the Society's correspondence, that she pay the sum of €650 to the Society towards the costs of its investigation, b) Failed to reply to the Society's letters dated 10 March 2005, 30 March 2005, 10 June 2005, 16 June 2005, 30 March 2006, 8 June 2006, 14 July 2006, 10 January 2008, 11 February 2008, 19 February 2008, 3 March 2008, 12 March 2008, 3 April 2008, 16 April 2008, 24 April 2008 and 20 May 2008, c) Failed to attend or arrange to be represented at the meeting of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 25 June 2008, despite having been notified by letter dated 17 June 2008 that she was required to attend the said meeting, d) Failed, in her capacity as principal of the firm of Casey & Co to ensure full compliance in a timely manner or at all, up to the date of the swearing of the Society's affidavit, with an undertaking given to another firm of solicitors by the firm of Casey & Co dated 25 July 1998 and, in particular, up to in or about 25 February 2009, failed to discharge all Land Registry queries arising on the purchaser's application for registration, e) Repeatedly failed to respond to correspondence from and to communicate with the complainant regarding the matter of the outstanding Land Registry queries The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €7,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Martin J Kearns

1 Devon Place, The Crescent, Galway

19 June 2008

In the matter of Martin J Kearns, solicitor, of 1 Devon Place, The Crescent, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4403/DT72/07; High Court record no 2008 no 59SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Martin J Kearns (respondent solicitor) On 19 June 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 30 November 2006 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) in a timely manner or at all The tribunal directed the Law Society of Ireland to bring such finding of the tribunal in respect of the respondent solicitor before the High Court in circumstances where the solicitor had not yet filed his report to the Society The respondent solicitor had filed his accountant's report for the year ended 30 November 2006 prior to the High Court hearing date On 20 October 2008, the President of the High Court ordered that: a) The respondent solicitor do stand censured, b) The respondent solicitor do pay the fine of €5,000 to the Law Society of Ireland, c) The Law Society do recover the cost of the High Court proceedings and the cost of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal when taxed and ascertained The solicitor had filed his accountant's report for the year ended 30 November 2006 prior to the High Court hearing date

Martin J Kearns

1 Devon Place, The Crescent, Galway

14 May 2010

In the matter of Martin J Kearns, a solicitor of 1 Devon Place, The Crescent, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 [4403/DT366/03] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Martin J Kearns (respondent solicitor) On 14 May 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to implement the agreement made by his named client to sell her apartment back to a named purchaser in a timely manner, b) Failed to take the necessary steps to secure title to the apartment acquired by another named client in a timely manner, c) Failed to take the necessary steps to provide title to the named purchaser of the site agreed to be transferred to him in a timely manner, d) Failed to protect the interests of his clients, e) Failed to keep his clients fully informed, f) Failed to reply to correspondence from the Society in a timely manner or at all, and in particular letters dated 7 December 2000, 17 January 2001, 29 January 2001, 11 April 2001, 6 June 2001, 16 June 2001, 28 June 2001, 9 July 2001, 27 July 2001, 17 December 2001, 6 March 2002, 21 March 2002, 19 April 2002, g) Failed to furnish progress reports to the Society, as requested by letters dated 8 May 2001, 17 December 2001 and 6 March 2002 in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €10,000 as part restitution to the beneficiaries of the estate of a named deceased, without prejudice to the legal rights of such beneficiaries whether against the respondent solicitor or any other person, such sum to be distributed by the respondent solicitor to the beneficiaries concerned as if that sum formed part of the assets of the said estate; that sum to be so applied by the respondent solicitor not later than 31 December 2010, and c) Pay the whole of the costs of the applicant as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement, such costs, if agreed, to be paid by not later than 31 December 2010 or, if taxed in default of agreement, to be paid by not later than 183 days after the date of the certificate of taxation

Mary Miley

Mary Miley & Company at Brewery Place, Rathdrum, Co Wicklow

11 June 2008

In the matter of Mary Miley, a solicitor formerly practising as Mary Miley & Company at Brewery Place, Rathdrum, Co Wicklow, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3916/DT65/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Mary Miley (respondent solicitor) On 11 June 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she: a) Failed to reply to multiple letters from a solicitor colleague, b) Failed to reply to multiple correspondence from a lending institution, c) Failed to disclose in a timely fashion that she had lost a deed of vacate furnished to her in November 2004 by the lending institution, d) Through her conduct, frustrated the sale of the property of the clients of her solicitor colleague, e) Failed to reply to correspondence from the Society, f) Failed to comply with a notice served by the Society on her, pursuant to section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994, g) Represented that she would deliver the file to the Society on 14 May 2007 but did not do so, h) Misrepresented to the Society, in a letter dated 16 May 2007, that the matter had been resolved, i) Failed to comply in a timely manner with a direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee, made on 16 May 2007, that she make a contribution of €500 towards the costs incurred by the Society in the investigation of the complaint The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,69570 as restitution to a firm of solicitors, in order to be then transmitted to the relevant member(s) of a named family, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witnesses' expenses if any, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Mary O'Connor

Mary O'Connor & Company, 90 Marlborough Road, Donnybrook, Dublin 4

17 June 2004

In the matter of Mary O'Connor, solicitor, practising under the style and title of Mary O'Connor & Company at 90 Marlborough Road, Donnybrook, Dublin 4, and in the matter of an application by a client of the said Mary O'Connor to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [3023/DT396] A client of the respondent solicitor (applicant) Mary O'Connor (respondent solicitor) On 17 June 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in that she had: a) Failed to provide her client with particulars in writing of the actual charges, contrary to section 68(1)(a) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 b) Failed to provide her client with an estimate of the charges, contrary to section 68(1)(b) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 c) Failed to provide her client with any information on the basis on which the charges would be made, contrary to section 68(1)(c) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 d) Failed to inform her client in writing of the client's right to require a solicitor to submit a bill of costs to a taxing master of the High Court for taxation on a solicitor and own client basis, contrary to section 68(8)(b)(i) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the applicant as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Matthew Breslin

Donal J O'Neill & Co Solicitors, at 3 Denny Street, Tralee, Co Kerry

20 May 2008

In the matter of Matthew Breslin, solicitor, practising under the style and title of Donal J O'Neill & Co Solicitors, at 3 Denny Street, Tralee, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [7159/DT35/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Matthew Breslin (respondent solicitor) On 20 May 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to complete a conveyance of property as instructed, in that he did not register in the Registry of Deeds the deed of conveyance of the transferor to the transferee, b) Misrepresented to the Society, in a letter dated 26 October 2005, that he had taken all steps required of him in relation to the transferee, c) Provided the complainant with false and/or misleading information, as evidenced in her letter to the Society dated 5 October 2005, by representing to her that the transfer had gone through when it had not, d) Sought to prevent the Society investigating the matter by falsely stating in the same letter that the complainant's suggestion that he may not have completed the transfer properly in her email letter dated 5 October 2005 initiating the complaint was grossly and factually inaccurate, when he knew that in fact he had not completed the transfer, e) Sought to further prevent the Society investigating the matter by falsely stating in a letter to the Society, dated 27 January 2006, that any allegations made had been falsely and unduly made against him, f) Failed to provide any or any adequate response to the Society's enquiries during its investigation as to whether he had accepted and/or completed instructions to transfer the property the subject matter of the complaint, and in particular failed to respond properly or at all to the Society's letters of 6 October 2005, 20 October 2005, 9 November 2005, 23 November 2005 and 8 December 2005, g) Misrepresented in a letter to the Society, dated 31 January 2006, that he did not hold title deeds for the property the subject matter of the complaint when in fact he had received the title documents from the complainant's son, h) Provided false and misleading information to the Society by indicating in his letter to the Society, dated 31 January 2006, that he did not have instructions in relation to the property the subject matter of the complaint in circumstances where he subsequently stated that he had accepted and acted upon instructions to transfer the said property, i) Caused a colleague to misrepresent to the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 1 February 2006 that he had not transferred the property to the complainant when he had in fact obtained the execution of the transfer document, which he had subsequently lost, j) By his conduct, caused considerable distress to the complainant, as evidenced by her email letter to the Society dated 28 February 2006, k) Falsely alleged in a letter to the Society, dated 6 March 2006, that the emails from the complainant to the Society, and which had been copied to him, were offensive and disturbing and that the complainant was engaging in a witch hunt, l) Swore an affidavit on 7 March 2006, and furnished to the Society, falsely stating that he had never dealt with the property the subject matter of the complaint when he had a deed of transfer of the property executed and in respect of which he admitted to the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 8 March 2006 that he did not know where the deed was, m) Falsely stated in a letter to the Society, dated 6 March 2006, that he was furnishing the entire file to the Society but admitted to the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 8 March 2006 that the correspondence was no longer on the file, n) Falsely stated in his affidavit sworn on 7 March 2006 that he held no monies belonging to the complainant and her son when he knew he held €600 received from the complainant's son and which he reimbursed via the Society under cover of letter dated 18 April 2006, o) Furnished the committee with false and/or misleading and contradictory information by stating at the committee meeting on 8 March 2006 that he could not have transferred the property the subject matter of the complaint as he did not have the title deeds to same, in circumstances where he later admitted that he had acted upon instructions but had lost the deed of transfer The tribunal made an order that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay €8,700 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Matthew Breslin

Donal J O'Neill & Co Solicitors, at 3 Denny Street, Tralee, Co Kerry

24 July 2008

In the matter of Matthew Breslin, a solicitor practising as Donal J O'Neill & Company, Solicitors, 3 Denny Street, Tralee, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Matthew Breslin (respondent solicitor) On 24 July 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to provide adequate legal services to the complainant in relation to the stamping and registration of a conveyance made between the complainant and other named persons, made on 30 December 1997 and in relation to property at a named location, b) Failed to clarify queries in relation to property at another named location to the complainant and his named solicitor, c) Failed to respond adequately to letters from named solicitors dated 25 April 2006, 15 May 2006, 13 July 2006, 11 August 2006 and 7 September 2006 respectively, d) Failed to adequately respond to the Society's correspondence and, in particular, letters dated 4 January 2007, 22 January 2007, 1 February 2007, 26 March 2007, 4 April 2007, 23 April 2007, 23 May 2007 and 29 May 2007 respectively The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €10,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Matthew Breslin

Donal J O'Neill & Co Solicitors, at 3 Denny Street, Tralee, Co Kerry

30 October 2008

In the matter of Matthew Breslin, a solicitor of Donal O'Neill & Company, 3 Denny Street, Tralee, Co Kerry, and in the matter of an application by a named client of the respondent solicitor to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [7159/DT14/08] A named client of the respondent (applicant) Matthew Breslin (respondent solicitor) On 30 October 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Kept information and documents back, b) Dragged out paperwork without any explanations The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €4,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the expenses of the applicant and his witnesses attending before the tribunal on 23 July 2008 and 30 October 2008, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Michael A Dowling

Michael A Dowling & Company, Solicitors, Church Street, Tralee, Co Kerry

18 November 2003

In the matter of Michael A Dowling, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Michael A Dowling & Co at Church Street, Tralee, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002[3995/DT392] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael A Dowling (respondent solicitor) On 18 November 2003, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to apply for a practising certificate for the year 2003 in a timely manner, having only applied for same on 11 March 2003 b) Practised as a solicitor without a practising certificate for the period 1 January 2003 to 11 March 2003 in breach of the provisions of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: i) Do stand admonished ii) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund in relation to the finding set out at (a) above iii) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund in relation to the finding set out at (b) above iv) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by the taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Michael A Dowling

Michael A Dowling & Company, Solicitors, Church Street, Tralee, Co Kerry

20 March 2007

In the matter of Michael A Dowling, a solicitor carrying on practice under the style and title of Michael A Dowling & Company, Solicitors, Church Street, Tralee, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3995/DT64/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael A Dowling (respondent solicitor) On 20 March 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to furnish the following documentation in a timely manner or at all: i) Counterpart lease for each apartment, ii) Land Registry-approved scheme map, iii) Certificate of incorporation of management company, iv) Memorandum and articles of association of management company, v) Memorandum of agreement between a named company of the one part and the management company of the other part to transfer the common areas; b) Failed to respond to the Society's letters, and in particular those letters dated 14 April 2005, 18 May 2005, 24 May 2005, 14 June 2005, 4 July 2005, 12 August 2005, 21 October 2005, 9 October 2005, 5 December 2005, in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised, b) Pay a sum of €10,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the sum of €10,000 as restitution to his clients, without prejudice to any legal right they may otherwise have, same to be paid within seven days of the making of the tribunal's order; d) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, together with witnesses' expenses, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Michael A Petty

M Petty & Company, Parliament Street, Ennistymon, Co Clare

9 June 2009

In the matter of Michael A Petty, a solicitor formerly practising under the style and title of M Petty & Company, Solicitors, Parliament Street, Ennistymon, Co Clare, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [3387/DT09/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael Petty (respondent solicitor) On 9 June 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to reply to any correspondence from the Society in relation to the investigation of the complaint of a named complainant and, in particular, the Society's letters of 24 May 2007, 6 June 2007, 18 June 2007, 28 June 2007, 19 July 2007, 14 August 2007, 19 September 2007, 1 October 2007, 9 October 2007, 22 October 2007, b) Failed to comply with a notice issued pursuant to section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 and dated 19 September 2007 in a timely manner, and failed to produce his file to the Society until compelled to do so by order of the High Court made on 26 November 2007, c) Failed to attend a meeting of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee on 17 October 2007, despite being required to do so The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Michael B O'Donnell

Michael B O'Donnell, Solicitor, Rathkeale, Co Limerick

11 May 2010

In the matter of Michael B O'Donnell, a solicitor practising as Michael B O'Donnell, Solicitor, at Rathkeale, Co Limerick, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 [8415/DT81/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael B O'Donnell (respondent solicitor) On 11 May 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor, as follows: a) That he communicated directly with another solicitor's client instead of through that client's solicitor, b) That he paid the proceeds of the sale of property directly to the vendor instead of the vendor's solicitor, c) That he paid the proceeds referred to at (b) above, notwithstanding written instructions from the vendor's solicitor on closing and contained in a letter dated 14 July 2004 that all documentation furnished to be held in trust pending the receipt by the vendor's solicitor of the balance of the purchase money, d) That he, through his conduct, precluded the vendor's solicitor from complying with his undertaking to a lending institution The tribunal, after 33 adjournments, on 11 May 2010, ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €12,000 to the compensation fund, and c) Pay the whole of the costs of the applicant as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Michael Browne

Michael Browne, Solicitors, James Street, Westport, Co Mayo

23 February 2010

In the matter of Michael Browne, a solicitor practising as Michael Browne, Solicitors, James Street, Westport, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2008 (2072/DT116/09) Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael Browne (respondent solicitor) On 23 February 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2008 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, SI no 421 of 2001, in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Michael Crawford

Michael Crawford & Company at Manorhamilton, Co Leitrim

24 October 2006

In the matter of Michael Crawford, a solicitor practising as Michael Crawford & Company at Manorhamilton, Co Leitrim, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5022/DT10/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael Crawford (respondent solicitor) On 24 October 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to respond to the correspondence of the Society, and in particular the letters dated 4 May 2005, 19 May 2005, 1 June 2005, 22 June 2005, 6 July 2005, 19 July 2005, 29 July 2005, 15 August 2005, in a timely manner or at all The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor do stand admonished and advised The tribunal made no order as to costs

Michael Gleasure

Michael Gleasure & Co Solicitors, 7 Maine Street, Tralee, Co Kerry

14 December 2009

In the matter of Michael Gleasure, a solicitor formerly practising as Michael Gleasure & Co Solicitors, 7 Maine Street, Tralee, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [6697/DT80/08 and High Court record no 2009 no 107 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael Gleasure (respondent solicitor) On 8 October 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Misappropriated client funds by improperly transferring monies from the client account to the office account and, in particular, improperly transferred monies from the client account to the office account in circumstances where he had failed to furnish fee notes and where there was no evidence of work done to justify the transfer of funds in respect of fees, b) Misappropriated monies totalling in or about €18,150 from the client ledger account of a named client by improperly transferring monies in or about that amount to the office account, c) Misappropriated monies totalling in or about €42,670 from the client account of named clients by improperly transferring monies in or about that amount to the office account, d) Misappropriated monies totalling in or about €50,820 from the client deposit account of a named client by improperly withdrawing monies in or about that amount from the client deposit account, e) Improperly withdrew monies totalling in or about €11,154 (or a part thereof) from the client account of a named client, f) Failed to apply monies received to the credit of named clients for the purpose for which they were received, namely, failed to discharge the balance due to redeem capital on an outstanding loan and misapplied the said monies, or a part thereof, by improperly transferring the sum of in or about €7,865 from the client account to the office account, g) Misappropriated the sum of in or about €8,470 from the client account of named clients by improperly transferring monies in or about that amount to the office account, h) Misappropriated monies from the client account of named clients by converting monies received for payment of stamp duty and land registry fees to his own use by transferring monies totalling in or about €3,62879 from the client account to the office account, i) Misappropriated funds of in or about €3,630 from the client ledger account of named clients by way of an allocation of a payment previously made out of the client account in the amount of €1,210 to the client ledger account of the above named clients, together with a further transfer from their client ledger account to the office account of €2,420, j) Misappropriated monies from the client account of a named client by improperly transferring monies to the office account such that the sum of in or about €95,462 remained on the client ledger as at 29 August 2006, in circumstances where a balance of in or about €100,519 was due to the client, k) Misappropriated monies totalling in or about €3,025 from the client account of a named client by improperly transferring monies in or about that amount to the office account, l) By his acts, caused a deficit in funds payable to and/or on behalf of clients of his former practice, by the compensation fund of the Society, as at 28 August 2008, of in or about €116,11266, m) Improperly transferred monies from deposits received in conveyancing matters from the client account to the office account, n) Breached regulation 7 of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) by withdrawing monies from the client account that were not properly available to be so withdrawn in accordance with the provisions of that regulation, o) Breached regulation 11 of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 by failing to furnish bills of costs in accordance with the provisions of that regulation The tribunal directed that: i) The respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, ii) The name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, iii) The respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 14 December 2009, the President of the High Court ordered that: 1) The respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors' profession, 2) The name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 3) The Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained

Michael Hinkson

Hinkson Solicitors, Fields Corner, Churchtown, Dublin 14

30 September 2008

In the matter of Michael Hinkson, solicitor, practising as Hinkson Solicitors, Fields Corner, Churchtown, Dublin 14, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael Hinkson (respondent solicitor) On 30 September 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Breached regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, SI no 421 of 2001, in failing to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report covering his financial year ended 31 March 2007 within six months thereafter, that is, by 30 September 2007, b) Through his conduct, showed a disregard for his own statutory obligations and the Society's statutory obligations to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients, the solicitors' profession and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the sum of €3,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Michael J Butler

Michael J Butler Solicitors, 42-43 Main Street, Tipperary

20 March 2007

In the matter of Michael J Butler, a solicitor practising as Michael J Butler Solicitors, 42-43 Main Street, Tipperary, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [2150/DT96/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael J Butler (respondent solicitor) On 20 March 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2005 within six months on that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, Statutory Instrument No 421 of 2001; b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligations to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement


Michael J Butler

Michael J Butler Solicitors, 42-43 Main Street, Tipperary

20 May 2008

In the matter of Michael J Butler, a solicitor practising as Michael J Butler Solicitors, 42/43 Main Street, Tipperary, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [2150/DT71/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael J Butler (respondent solicitor) On 20 May 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2006 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (statutory instrument no 421 of 2001) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €750 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Michael J Murphy

4 Dun Ard, Knockcroghery, Co Roscommon

20 February 2008

In the matter of Michael J Murphy, a solicitor of 4 Dun Ard, Knockcroghery, Co Roscommon, and in the matter of an application by Stephen Glanville to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4803/DT57/06] Stephen Glanville (applicant) Michael J Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 20 February 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he deprived the applicant of his fees The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €100 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the costs of the applicant in respect of the disciplinary hearings held on 19 July 2007 and 25 October 2007 as taxed by the taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Michael J Murphy

c/o PJ Walsh & Co Solicitors, 12 Upper Fitzwilliam Street, Dublin 2

27 July 2009

In the matter of Michael J Murphy, a solicitor formerly practising as MJ Murphy & Co Solicitors, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 [4803/DT46/07 and High Court record 2009 no 80 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael J Murphy (respondent solicitor) On 27 July 2009, the President of the High Court made an order in relation to the respondent solicitor: 1) That the respondent solicitor should not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership, that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor in the employment and under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, 2) That the Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings before the High Court and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal when taxed and ascertained The president had before him a report of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal of a hearing before it on 3 July 2008 The tribunal found the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: 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, Procured his client to sign a document dated 10 May 2002, whereby his client agreed that the solicitor and own client fees would be 25% of the damages, that is, €5,000, before he had settled the party and party costs recoverable from the defendant, Procured his client to sign the foregoing document, in which his client effectively waived his right to be appraised of the party and party costs offered on his behalf to his solicitor and to his right to seek taxation of same, Charged his client fees, notwithstanding that he was entitled to recover those fees from the defendant or, in the alternative, failed to demonstrate the services provided to his client, the fees for which were not recoverable from the defendant The opinion of the tribunal as to the fitness or otherwise of the respondent solicitor to be a member of the solicitors' profession and their recommendation as to the sanction that, in their opinion, should be imposed was as follows: That the respondent solicitor should not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership, that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance of the Law Society of Ireland, That the respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed in default of agreement

Michael JP Buggy

Michael Buggy & Co 41 Parliament Street, Kilkenny

13 June 2006

In the matter of Michael JP Buggy, solicitor, practising as Michael Buggy & Co 41 Parliament Street, Kilkenny, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5231/DT13/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael JP Buggy (respondent solicitor) On 13 June 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor had been guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Charged his client a professional fee purportedly for services provided by the solicitor, the fees for which were not recoverable from the Residential Institutions Redress Board, but failed to produce any documentary or any evidence of such work; b) Subsequently negotiated his client's costs with the Residential Institutions Redress Board without informing his client and obtaining his instructions on the amount being offered by the Residential Institutions Redress Board in respect of such costs; c) Breached section 68(3) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 by deducting fees from his client's award without the written authority of his client; d) Breached section 68(6) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 by failing to furnish to his client a bill of costs as prescribed by the provisions of the section The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Michael Kieran Griffin

Kieran Griffin & Company, Exchange House, Ballincollig, Co Cork

30 April 2009

In the matter of Michael Kieran Griffin, a solicitor of Kieran Griffin & Company, Exchange House, Ballincollig, Co Cork, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [10174/DT60/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael Kieran Griffin (respondent solicitor) On 30 April 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Allowed a deficit of €134,500 of client funds as of 31 March 2008, b) Misapplied stamp duty of €134,500, which was given to the solicitor for the purposes of stamping the purchase of a named property in Ballincollig, Co Cork The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor do stand admonished

Michael Lynn

Capel Law, Unit 5, The Capel Buildings, Mary's Abbey, Dublin 7

23 May 2008

In the matter of Michael Lynn, a solicitor formerly practising under the style and title of Capel Law, Unit 5, The Capel Buildings, Mary's Abbey, Dublin 7, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [7153/DT/15/08 and High Court record no 2008 no 32SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael Lynn (respondent solicitor) On 22 April 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to ICS Building Society, dated 6 April 2004, in respect of 8 Cluainbui, Liscarra, Carrick-on-Shannon, to stamp and register mortgage and lodge title documents with the financial institution in consideration of the lender agreeing to the drawdown of a loan facility in respect of the property, b) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to ICS Building Society, dated 6 April 2004, in respect of 9 Cluainbui, Liscarra, Carrick-on-Shannon, to stamp and register mortgage and lodge title documents with the financial institution in consideration of the lender agreeing to the drawdown of a loan facility in respect of the property, c) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to ICS Building Society, dated 6 April 2004, in respect of 18 Cluainbui, Liscarra, Carrick-on-Shannon, to stamp and register mortgage and lodge title documents with the financial institution in consideration of the lender agreeing to the drawdown of a loan facility in respect of the property, d) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to ICS Building Society, dated 6 April 2004, in respect of 23 Cluainbui, Liscarra, Carrick-on-Shannon, to stamp and register mortgage and lodge title documents with the financial institution in consideration of the lender agreeing to the drawdown of a loan facility in respect of the property, e) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to ICS Building Society, dated 6 April 2004, in respect of 26 Cluainbui, Liscarra, Carrick-on-Shannon, to stamp and register mortgage and lodge title documents with the financial institution in consideration of the lender agreeing to the drawdown of a loan facility in respect of the property, f) Notwithstanding the earlier undertakings, on 8 December 2004 furnished an undertaking to ACC Bank Limited in respect of a named borrower in respect of the property at 8 Cluainbui, Liscarra, Carrick-on-Shannon, g) Notwithstanding the earlier undertakings to ICS, on 28 March 2006 furnished an undertaking to Bank of Ireland in respect of the same property, 8 Cluainbui, Liscarra, Carrick-on-Shannon, in respect of named clients, h) Notwithstanding his earlier undertaking to ICS Building Society in respect of 9 Cluainbui, Liscarra, Carrick-on-Shannon, in respect of borrowings on his own behalf or on behalf of a named client, he furnished to ICS Building Society a further undertaking, dated 18 December 2006, in respect of a named client, to be secured on the same title, i) Notwithstanding his earlier undertaking to ICS Building Society, he furnished to Ulster Bank Limited an undertaking on 17 December 2004 in respect of the properties 23 and 26 Cluainbui, Liscarra, Carrick-on-Shannon, in respect of further borrowings, to stamp and register the charge in favour of the Ulster Bank Limited, j) Misled the Law Society and the complainants in correspondence by failing to indicate that he had signed further undertakings in respect of the same properties and had failed to stamp and register charges or furnish title documents to the complainants in accordance with his undertakings dated 6 April 2004, k) Failed to respond to the Law Society's correspondence The tribunal ordered the Law Society to bring the report of the tribunal in respect of the respondent solicitor before the High Court, with recommendations that the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, pay a monetary penalty of €1,000,000, and pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society and witness expenses, to be taxed in default of agreement On 23 May 2008, the President of the High Court ordered: i) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, ii) That the respondent solicitor pay a monetary penalty of €1,000,000 to the Law Society, iii) That the Law Society recover from the respondent solicitor the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and the cost of the application to the High Court when taxed in default of agreement, iv) That the files in the matter and the report of the tribunal to the High Court be referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions and to the Fraud Squad to investigate the matters therein

Michael Lynn

Capel Law, Unit 5, The Capel Buildings, Mary's Abbey, Dublin 7

23 May 2008

In the matter of Michael Lynn, a solicitor formerly practising under the style and title of Capel Law, Unit 5, The Capel Buildings, Mary's Abbey, Dublin 7, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [7153/DT16/08 and High Court record no 2007 no 50SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael Lynn (respondent solicitor) On 22 April 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: 1) Engaged in conduct tending to bring the solicitors' profession into disrepute by absenting himself from the jurisdiction and ceasing all cooperation with the Law Society's investigations, notwithstanding assurances by his legal representatives to the President of the High Court that he would fully cooperate with the investigation being conducted by the Law Society, 2) Engaged in conduct tending to bring the solicitors' profession into disrepute by fraudulently giving multiple undertakings to financial institutions in respect of the same property, 3) Engaged in conduct tending to bring the solicitors' profession into disrepute by, in particular, the manner in which he dealt with lands at Derrockstown, Dunshaughlin, Co Meath, comprised in folio 20883F Co Meath and folio 33630F Co Meath (the Derrockstown property), 4) Dishonestly caused or permitted undertakings to be furnished by his practice to three financial institutions, namely First Active, AIB Bank plc and IIB Homeloans Limited, in respect of borrowings advanced by those financial institutions to him/to him and a third party secured on the Derrockstown property, 5) Failed to comply with an undertaking given by his practice to solicitors acting for the purchasers of the Derrockstown property by letter dated 1 August 2006 to redeem a mortgage in favour of First Active plc insofar as it affected the Derrockstown property, and to furnish those solicitors with evidence of same, 6) Failed to comply with an undertaking given by his practice to the solicitors acting for the purchasers of the Derrockstown property by letter dated 2 August 2006 to remove AIB Bank plc charges appearing on the Land Registry folio 20883F, 7) Failed to lodge the original land certificate MH20883F with the Land Registry so as to enable the purchasers of the Derrockstown property to register their interest in the property, in breach of an undertaking given by his firm by letter dated 1 August 2006 to "deal with any Land Registry queries which may arise on the registration of your client's title", 8) Dishonestly failed to make the purchasers of the Derrockstown property aware of all borrowings against the property, 9) Deliberately misled the purchasers of the Derrockstown property by permitting a letter dated 1 August 2006 to be sent to the purchasers' solicitors, which stated that there were no dealings pending that affected the Derrockstown property other than those already disclosed, in circumstances where there were other borrowings against the property, which had not been disclosed to the purchasers and in respect of which undertakings had been given by the respondent solicitor's practice to register charges against the said property, 10) Failed to comply with an undertaking dated 10 June 2004, signed by an authorised solicitor in the respondent solicitor's firm, to IIB Homeloans Limited, by which the respondent solicitor's firm undertook to ensure the execution of a first legal mortgage/charge on the Derrockstown property in favour of IIB Homeloans Limited and the registration of same so as to ensure that IIB Homeloans Limited obtained a first legal mortgage/charge on the property, 11) Failed to comply with an undertaking given by the respondent solicitor to AIB Bank plc, dated 13 July 2001, by which the respondent solicitor undertook to ensure that he had title to the Derrockstown property free from encumbrances save for AIB Bank plc's mortgage/charge and to ensure the execution and registration of a mortgage by him in favour of the bank over the property, 12) Dishonestly failed to use the monies received from proceeds of sale of the Derrockstown property to discharge outstanding charges on the property and caused and/or knowingly allowed the monies to be transferred from the client account to companies controlled by him, 13) Caused or permitted a deficit to arise on the client account on 21 April 2004 in the sum of, in or around, €279,313, and further sought to remedy the deficit in a manner not permitted by the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (the regulations) by transfers from other clients' accounts, 14) Acted dishonestly by failing to disclose to financial institutions to which he had applied for a loan, secured/secured in part on the Derrockstown property, the existence of other borrowings secured/secured in part on the same property, 15) Engaged in conduct tending to bring the solicitors' profession into disrepute by, in particular, the manner in which he dealt with Glenlion House, Howth, Co Dublin, 16) Dishonestly obtained loans totalling in or around €11,755,000 from three financial institutions, ACC Bank plc, Bank of Scotland (Ireland) Limited and Irish Nationwide Building Society, in connection with the purchase of a personal residence, Glenlion House, for the sum of €5,500,000, 17) Dishonestly applied funds of €4,125,000, advanced by Irish Nationwide Building Society to the respondent solicitor and his wife for the purchase of Glenlion House, for a purpose other than the purchase of the said property, 18) Dishonestly misrepresented to Irish Nationwide Building Society the purpose for which the loan of €4,125,000 was required, 19) Dishonestly applied funds advanced by Bank of Scotland (Ireland) Limited for the purchase of Glenlion for purposes other than the purchase of the said property, 20) Failed to comply with an undertaking signed by a partner in his firm to Bank of Scotland (Ireland) Limited on 17 April 2007, which undertook to secure for the bank and register a first legal mortgage/charge on the Glenlion property, 21) Failed to comply with an undertaking signed by a partner in his firm on 20 March 2007 to ACC Bank plc to execute and register a charge in favour of ACC Bank plc on the Glenlion property and furnish evidence of same within seven days of completion, 22) Failed to comply with an undertaking signed by a partner in his firm on 16 January 2007 to Irish Nationwide Building Society, which undertook to ensure the execution of a first legal mortgage/charge on the Glenlion property and registration of same in favour of Irish Nationwide Building Society, 23) Falsified or knowingly permitted the falsification of client ledger cards, 24) In particular, falsified or knowingly permitted the falsification of certain client ledger records, 25) Further falsified or knowingly permitted the falsification of a particular client's ledger card, 26) Dishonestly transferred monies from client accounts to fund a personal transaction, that is, the purchase of Glenlion House, without client authority and/or failed to maintain any documentation on the client file recording authorisation of relevant transfers, 27) Permitted falsified documentation to be maintained on a practice file, namely a false document purporting to be a genuine fax dated 14 March 2007 from solicitors for Irish Nationwide Building Society and a false document purporting to be a genuine mortgage offer from Irish Nationwide Building Society dated 5 January 2007, 28) Deliberately attempted to mislead the Law Society's investigating accountant by furnishing her/permitting her to be furnished with the said falsified documentation, 29) Failed to maintain proper practice files in respect of transactions, and in particular failed to maintain correspondence on client files and further failed to maintain vouching documentation on practice files in relation to borrowings from financial institutions, 30) Failed to maintain proper books of account and such relevant supporting documents as would enable clients' monies handled and dealt with by him to be duly recorded and the entries relevant thereto in the books of account to be appropriately vouched, in breach of regulation 12(1) of the regulations, 31) Breached regulation 3(4)(i) of the Solicitors (Practice, Conduct and Discipline) Regulations 1996 (SI no 178/1996) by wrongfully referring to 'Overseas Property Law' on the headed notepaper of the respondent solicitor's practice, notwithstanding the Law Society's refusal to consent to the use of the name 'Overseas Property Law' by the respondent solicitor, 32) Caused a minimum deficit on the client account as of 31 August 2007 in the amount of €702,823, 33) Misappropriated further client monies in the amount of €42,000 by debiting a client account, 34) Wrongfully utilised the sum of €42,000 to purchase, on 20 December 2006, two bank drafts for €21,000 each, which he used in the purchase of property for himself at Bessborough Avenue, Dublin 1, 35) Transferred further client monies in the amount of €100,000 from the client account to the office account, debiting the client ledger of a client in circumstances where there was no bill of costs and outlay or any other verifying documentation on the file of that client, 36) Wrongfully debited the client ledger account of the same client with €7,500, which he used to purchase a bank draft in favour of another unrelated client, 37) Withdrew the sums of €64,86257 and €56,51957 in July 2007 from the client account to the office account but did not record these transactions in the books of account, in breach of regulation 7 of the regulations, 38) Breached regulation 12(2) of the regulations by failing to maintain books of account that showed the true financial position in relation to the respondent solicitor's transactions with clients' monies, 39) Breached regulation 12(1) of the regulations by failing to maintain proper books of account and such relevant supporting documents as would enable clients' monies handled and dealt with by the respondent solicitor to be duly recorded and the entries relevant thereto in the books of account to be appropriately vouched, 40) Breached regulation 8(3)(b) of the regulations by failing to have the necessary supporting documents in respect of bank drafts purchased with clients' monies, 41) Breached regulation 7(1)(a) of the regulations by withdrawing monies from clients' accounts other than as permitted by regulation 7(1)(a)(i) to (iv) inclusive and where the Society had not given any directions as provided for in regulation 8(4) of the regulations, 42) Breached regulation 8(4) of the regulations by withdrawing clients' monies from the client account other than as permitted by the said regulation, 43) Conducted personal transactions through the client account in breach of the regulations and in particular in breach of regulation 5 of the regulations, 44) Breached regulation 5(4) of the regulations by paying into or holding in a client account monies other than clients' monies, 45) Breached regulation 28(2) of the regulations by failing to provide the information sought by an authorised person conducting an investigation pursuant to the regulations, 46) Breached regulation 7(2) of the regulations by discharging personal expenditure from the client account The tribunal ordered the Law Society to bring the report of the tribunal in respect of the respondent solicitor before the High Court, with recommendations that the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, pay a monetary penalty of €1,000,000, and pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society and witness expenses, to be taxed in default of agreement On 23 May 2008, the President of the High Court ordered: i) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, ii) That the respondent solicitor pay a monetary penalty of €1,000,000 to the Law Society, iii) That the Law Society recover from the respondent solicitor the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and the costs of the application to the High Court when taxed in default of agreement, and iv) That the files in the matter and the report of the tribunal to the High Court be referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions and to the Fraud Squad to investigate the matters therein

Michael McDarby

Michael McDarby & Company, Solicitors, Glebe Street, Ballinrobe, Co Mayo

18 September 2008

In the matter of Michael McDarby and Sean Acton, solicitors practising under the style of Michael McDarby & Company, Solicitors, Glebe Street, Ballinrobe, Co Mayo, and in the matter of an application by a named client of the respondent solicitors to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4200-7533/DT31/07] A named client of the respondent solicitors (applicant) Michael McDarby (first-named respondent solicitor) Sean Acton (second-named respondent solicitor) On 18 September 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitors guilty of misconduct in their practice as solicitors in respect of the following complaints set out in the affidavit of the applicant sworn on 22 February 2007: a) The applicant subsequently engaged Sean Acton, of Michael McDarby & Co to pursue her civil action arising out the damage to her vehicle and injuries sustained in the accident The applicant was not aware, nor did Sean Acton make her aware, that his partner, Michael McDarby, in the firm of solicitors Michael McDarby & Co was or had already acted for one of the other parties involved in the accident The applicant believes he should have told her, and she believes that he should have been aware of that fact, as there is a duty and responsibility on him to know those things He had advised her to plead in the District Court to careless driving and had represented her in that court and obtained a full booklet of statements from the gardaεΥ at that time, and the applicant cannot believe or see how either he or his partner Michael McDarby could not be aware of that fact b) The applicant believes that the first thing Michael McDarby would have done in representing the other party is to obtain the booklet of statements from the gardaεΥ, and there wouldn't be much point in obtaining statements from the gardaεΥ if her solicitor, Sean Acton, in the same office, had already obtained them Furthermore, the applicant believes that it would be necessary for Michael McDarby to ascertain what transpired in the District Court and how the prosecution against her had concluded The applicant finds it difficult to believe that, in making those enquiries, he would not have ascertained that his partner, Sean Acton, had acted for her in the District Court and hence he would have been aware that there was a clear conflict of interest in members of his solicitors' firm acting for two sides of proceedings arising out of the same traffic accident, where it was obvious that a conflict of interest not alone had, but would, arise c) Not alone did Sean Acton act for the applicant in the criminal case, but he was also pursuing a civil action at the same time as his partner Michael McDarby was pursuing a civil action for another party involved in the same action The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitors: a) Stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay 25% of the costs of the applicant as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Michael Mooney

Osborne MacGettigan and Co Solicitors, Milford, Co Donegal

18 May 2009

Notice: the High Court Record no: 2009 no 52 SA In the matter of Michael Mooney, a solicitor formerly practising under the style and title of Osborne MacGettigan & Co Solicitors, Milford, Co Donegal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 Take notice that, by order of the High Court made on Monday 18 May 2009, it was ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) That the respondent solicitor do cooperate fully in any further application that might have to be made to the Circuit Court on behalf of named clients in order to cancel the original registration of them as full owners as of 28 July 2005 of folio 4296F Co Donegal, grounded as it was on the admitted forged deed of transfer dated 22 December 2004, in order that the named clients are again registered as full owners of the said folio on foot of their beneficial interest deriving from other named clients, whose interest derived from the purchase transaction closed by the respondent solicitor on behalf of those other named clients on 22 August 1995 and the deed of transfer delivered on that date from a named third party (as legal personal representative of another named third party, deceased, the then registered full owner) to the said other named clients, whose resulting legal entitlement to be registered as full owners has never taken place or, apparently, noted in any way by the Property Registration Authority, formerly the Land Registry, 3) That the respondent solicitor pay the sum of €10,000 as compensation to the Compensation Fund of the Law Society of Ireland, 4) That the Law Society recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained John Elliot, Registrar of Solicitors June 2009

Michael O'Connor

DJ O'Malley & Co 9/10 Glentworth Street, Limerick

21 November 2006

In the matter of Michael O'Connor, a solicitor of DJ O'Malley & Co practising at 9/10 Glentworth Street, Limerick, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6218/DT44/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael O'Connor (respondent solicitor) On 21 November 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Drew or allowed to be drawn solicitor/client fees from the client account by means of client account cheques payable to the relevant clients without recording same in the office account books and without lodging same in the office account in breach of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, b) Allowed professional fees to be posted to the debit of the office ledger when the costs were transferred from the client account to the office account instead of when bills were issued, c) Allowed party-and-party professional fees to be transferred from client account to office account without having been billed to the clients involved as required by regulation 11(1) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay a sum of €3,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Michael O'Loughlin

MD O'Loughlin & Company, Solicitors, Suite 11, Parklands Office Park, Southern Cross Road, Bray, Co Wicklow

16 October 2008

In the matter of Michael O'Loughlin, a solicitor practising in the firm of MD O'Loughlin & Company, Solicitors, Suite 11, Parklands Office Park, Southern Cross Road, Bray, Co Wicklow, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael O'Loughlin (respondent solicitor) On 16 October 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: 1) Misrepresented to the complainant that he had received a further "offer of settlement" of €7,500 plus costs from Ulster Bank Limited in the complainant's named action against Ulster Bank (Ireland) Limited in the Dublin Circuit Court and bearing a stated record number, when in fact he had received no such offer from Ulster Bank Limited, 2) Advised the complainant to accept this "offer of settlement" and ostensibly to compromise his claim in the complainant's action referred to above, 3) Mislaid and lost the complainant's file and papers relating to the complainant's action referred to above and misrepresented to the complainant that he was progressing the complainant's action and awaiting a court date, when in fact he had lost the complainant's file and had not progressed the complainant's action other than to issue and serve a civil bill The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €7,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witnesses' expenses, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Michael Otobo

59 Byron House, Slough SL3 8TS, England, formerly practising at 2nd Floor, 109 Lower Dorset Street, Dublin 1

9 March 2010

In the matter of Michael Otobo, solicitor, of 59 Byron House, Slough SL3 8TS, England, formerly practising at 2nd Floor, 109 Lower Dorset Street, Dublin 1, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [10073/DT86/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael Otobo (respondent solicitor) On 9 March 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor, in that he was in breach of the provisions of the Professional Indemnity Insurance Regulations and, in particular, the provisions of SI no 312 of 1995, as amended by SI no 362 of 1999, having failed to obtain run-off cover for the year 2006 in accordance with the requirements of those regulations The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Michael Petty

M Petty & Company, Parliament Street, Ennistymon, Co Clare

7 December 2004

In the matter of Michael Petty, solicitor, practising as M Petty & Company, Parliament Street, Ennistymon, Co Clare, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [3387/DT441/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael Petty (respondent solicitor) On 7 December 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to respond to correspondence from the complainants in relation to the administration of the estate of a named deceased person b) Failed to respond to the society's correspondence, and in particular the society's letters of 12 May 2003, 29 May 2003, 11 June 2003, 24 June 2003, 19 August 2003, 16 September 2003, 30 September 2003, 6 November 2003, 19 December 2003 c) Failed to comply with the direction of the Registrar's Committee issued at its meeting of 4 November 2003 that the solicitor respond to the complainant's correspondence within 21 days The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: 1) Do stand censured, advised and admonished 2) Pay the sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund 3) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland or of any person appearing before the tribunal, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Michael Petty

M Petty & Company, Parliament Street, Ennistymon, Co Clare

21 November 2006

In the matter of Michael Petty, a solicitor practising under the style and title of M Petty & Company, Parliament Street, Ennistymon, Co Clare, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3387/DT61/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael T Petty (respondent solicitor) On 21 November 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to furnish any account to the beneficiaries setting out monies in the estate, monies paid out, tax paid, tax deducted or to be deducted b) Allowed confusion to arise in relation to the exact disbursement of funds held by the respondent solicitor In his letter of 7 August 2003, the solicitor referred to €153,24789 held in his client account, yet after disbursing €108,000, in December 2004, the respondent solicitor still retained €100,63349 at the date when he handed over the file to the Law Society c) Failed to take action in relation to the sale of a house in Ennistymon, which is apparently subject of a lease to a third party No action has been taken in relation to this property by the respondent solicitor, and this property forms part of the estate assets d) Grossly delayed, without reasonable explanation, the administration of this estate, the deceased person having died nine years ago e) Showed a complete disregard for the interests of the beneficiaries, whom he knew to be elderly and, by his conduct, deprived two of the beneficiaries, who died during his stewardship, of their enjoyment of their share in the estate f) Failed to deal with correspondence in relation to the complaint in a timely manner, and in particular failed to respond to the following letters at all: 26 April 2005 (Law Society to respondent solicitor), 11 May 2005 (Law Society to respondent solicitor), 11 May 2005 (Law Society to respondent solicitor), 2 June 2005 (Law Society to solicitor) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €6,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the expenses of the complainant in respect of his attendance at the inquiry and pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Michael T Petty

M Petty & Company, Parliament Street, Ennistymon, Co Clare

10 March 2008

In the matter of Michael T Petty, a solicitor formerly of M Petty & Company, Solicitors, Parliament Street, Ennistymon, Co Clare, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3387/DT21/07 and High Court record no 3SA 2008] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Michael T Petty (respondent solicitor) On 27 November 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to the complainant that he would deal with outstanding Land Registry queries, which undertaking was given at the time of closing of the sale in 1994, in a timely manner or at all, b) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence, and in particular the Society's letters of 19 July 2006, 1 August 2006, 10 August 2006, 13 September 2006, 20 October 2006, 13 November 2006 and 11 December 2006 in a timely manner or at all, c) Failed to respond to correspondence from the complainant to him in connection with the outstanding undertaking, which correspondence spanned a number of years The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal ordered that the Law Society of Ireland do bring such findings of the tribunal in respect of the respondent solicitor before the High Court, together with the report of the tribunal to the High Court, which report includes the opinion of the tribunal as to the fitness or otherwise of the respondent solicitor to be a member of the solicitors' profession, having regard to their findings and the recommendations of the tribunal as to the sanction that should be imposed, having regard to their findings in respect of the respondent solicitor On 10 March 2008, the President of the High Court ordered, pursuant to section 8 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1960 (as substituted by section 18 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 and amended by section 9 of the Solicitors(Amendment) Act 2002), that: 1) The respondent solicitor shall not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership, that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, 2) The respondent solicitor do deliver to Marian Petty, solicitor, all or any documents, files and papers in his possession or within his procurement arising from his practice as a solicitor, including all ledger cards and funds held for or on behalf of clients' files, 3) The Law Society do recover the cost of the proceedings herein and the cost of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal

Niall C Sheerin

Niall Sheerin & Company, Solicitors, Merchant's Court, 24 Merchant's Quay, Dublin 8

8 December 2005

In the matter of Niall C Sheerin, a solicitor practising as Niall Sheerin & Company, Solicitors, Merchant's Court, 24 Merchant's Quay, Dublin 8, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5132/DT17/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Niall C Sheerin (respondent solicitor) On 8 December 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking to hand over documentation on the closing of a sale in October 2002, and in particular those items summarised in the letter of 22 June 2004 sent by the complainants to the solicitor, in a timely manner; b) Failed to reply to the Society's correspondence and in particular the letters dated 7 July 2004, 20 July 2004, 3 August 2004, and 19 August 2004 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including the certified and reasonable travelling expenses of a named witness, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Niall O'Connor

Niall O'Connor & Co Solicitors, 15/17 Upper Abbey Street, Dublin 1

6 March 2007

In the matter of Niall O'Connor, a solicitor practising as Niall O'Connor & Co Solicitors at 15/17 Upper Abbey Street, Dublin 1, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [9911/DT77/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Niall M O'Connor (respondent solicitor) On 6 March 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report in respect of the period ended 31 December 2004 not later than six months after his accounting date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001; b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligations to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligatons to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Niall O'Kelly

Niall O'Kelly, Solicitors, 52 Fortfield Park, Terenure, Dublin 6W

7 December 2006

In the matter of Niall O'Kelly, a solicitor previously practising as principal of Niall O'Kelly, Solicitors, 52 Fortfield Park, Terenure, Dublin 6W, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5202/DT43/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Niall O'Kelly (respondent solicitor) On 7 December 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with his undertaking of 20 December 2001 in a timely manner to furnish the complainant with an original indenture of lease dated 3 November 1999 and made between a named company of the one part and the vendors (his clients) of the other part, duly registered in the registry of deeds, as soon as possible after completion; b) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence of 2 November 2004, 21 February 2005, 7 March 2005, 21 March 2005, 21 April 2005; c) Misled the Society in his letter of 15 December 2004 by indicating that he had requested a named solicitor to take over the file when this was not the case The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay €500 towards the costs of the Law Society of Ireland

Niall O'Kelly

Niall O'Kelly, Solicitor, 52 Fortfield Park, Terenure, Dublin 6W

25 May 2009

In the matter of Niall O'Kelly, a solicitor previously practising as Niall O'Kelly, Solicitor, 52 Fortfield Park, Terenure, Dublin 6W, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Niall O'Kelly (respondent solicitor) 5202/DT82/08 On 5 March 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking furnished on 3 April 1995 in a timely manner and, in particular, failed to register the deed of transfer and conveyance of the common areas to the management company in a timely manner and failed to furnish proof in relation to the acquisition of a freehold interest in a named property in Werburgh Street in a timely manner, b) Failed to reply to the Society's correspondence and, in particular, to the Society's letters of 20 September 2007, 4 October 2007, 16 October 2007, 31 October 2007, 7 December 2007, 28 January 2008, 7 February 2008, 23 April 2008 and 19 May 2008, c) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee at its meeting on 14 May 2008 that the solicitor furnish an updated progress report on or before 11 June 2008 5202/DT83/08 On 5 March 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking dated 1 June 2001 given on behalf of his former clients to a named financial institution in a timely manner, b) Failed to respond to the Society's letter of 8 April 2008, c) Failed to furnish a progress report to the Society, as requested, by 14 April 2008 in advance of the committee meeting on 14 May 2008 5202/DT81/08 On 5 March 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking dated 10 January 1995 to furnish a certified copy deed of assurance of the common areas to the management company duly stamped and registered in a timely manner, b) Failed to respond to correspondence from the Society in relation to the investigation of the complaint and, in particular, to the following letters: 13 November 2006, 14 December 2006, 21 December 2006, 1 June 2007, 25 June 2007, 13 July 2007, 30 July 2007, 17 August 2007, 4 September 2007, 27 September 2007, 5 October 2007, 29 November 2007, 12 December 2007, 21 December 2007, 28 January 2008, 25 February 2008, 6 March 2008, 7 April 2008, 26 May 2008 and 5 June 2008, c) Furnished a stamped deed dated 28 October 1999 to the Society on 14 May 2008, which was different from the deed of the same date furnished to the Society on 11 January 2007, and failed to explain to the Society why the two documents were different Having made the findings of misconduct against the solicitor in the three matters on 5 March 2009, the disciplinary tribunal ordered the Society to bring the findings to the High Court On 25 May 2009, in proceedings entitled '2009 no 58SA', the President of the High Court followed the recommendations of the tribunal and ordered that: a) The respondent solicitor should not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership, that he be permitted only to practise as a solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, b) The respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland in respect of the proceedings herein, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement, c) The respondent solicitor pay the outstanding costs due to the Law Society of Ireland on foot of the order of the tribunal made on 7 December 2006, d) The respondent solicitor pay the sum of €750 plus VAT in respect of legal fees due and owing to a named solicitor

Niall Patrick King

JF Williams and Company, Solicitors, Main St, Dungarvan, Co Waterford

1 June 2010

In the matter of Niall Patrick King, solicitor, practising in the firm of JF Williams & Company, Solicitors, Main Street, Dungarvan, Co Waterford, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4168/DT18/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Niall Patrick King (respondent solicitor) On 1 June 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: 1) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant by letter dated 17 July 2006, whereby he undertook to furnish a release of the existing Allied Irish Banks plc debenture registered as against Proform Construction Limited, 2) Failed to provide a written response to the Society during the course of its investigation into the complaint, and in particular in respect of correspondence dated 10 October 2007, 25 October 2007, 16 November 2007, 3 December 2007 and 3 January 2008 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, and of any person appearing before them, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement


Niall Sheerin

Niall Sheerin & Company, Solicitors, at Joyce House, 15 Ushers Island, Dublin 8

2 November 2006

In the matter of Niall Sheerin, a solicitor practising as Niall Sheerin & Company, Solicitors, at Joyce House, 15 Ushers Island, Dublin 8, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5132/DT47/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Niall Sheerin (respondent solicitor) On 2 November 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 March 2005 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Niall Sheerin

Niall Sheerin & Company, Solicitors, at 17 North King Street, Dublin 7

23 September 2008

In the matter of Niall Sheerin, a solicitor practising as Niall Sheerin & Company, Solicitors, at 17 North King Street, Dublin 7, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5132/DT47/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Niall Sheerin (respondent solicitor) On 23 September 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 March 2007 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligations to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Niall Sheerin

Niall Sheerin & Company, Solicitors, 40 Arran Quay, Dublin 7

17 June 2010

In the matter of Niall Sheerin, a solicitor practising as Niall Sheerin & Company, Solicitors, at 40 Arran Quay, Dublin 7, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2008 [5132/DT25/10] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Niall Sheerin (respondent solicitor) On 17 June 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 March 2009 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 41 of 2001) in a timely manner, b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligation to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Niamh McGovern

McGovern & Associates, Equity House, Dublin Road, Carrick-on-Shannon, Co Leitrim

10 September 2009

In the matter of Niamh McGovern, a solicitor, of McGovern & Associates, Equity House, Dublin Road, Carrick-on-Shannon, Co Leitrim, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6996/DT40/08] A named client of the respondent solicitor (applicant) Niamh McGovern (respondent solicitor) On 10 September 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she produced misleading reports of her actions on behalf of her client The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €250 towards the applicant's expenses

Nora McCarthy

McCarthy & Company, Solicitors, at 42 Temple Road, Dartry, Co Dublin

8 December 2005

In the matter of Nora McCarthy, a solicitor practising as McCarthy & Company, Solicitors, at 42 Temple Road, Dartry, Co Dublin, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3732/DT44/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Nora McCarthy (respondent solicitor) On 8 December 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she had failed to file her accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2002 with the Society in a timely manner, having only filed same with the Society on 30 March 2005, being approximately 21 months late, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Padraig Duffy

Tully & Duffy, Solicitors, 49 Laurence Street, Drogheda, Co Louth

22 April 2010

In the matter of Padraig Duffy, a solicitor practising as Tully & Duffy, Solicitors, 49 Laurence Street, Drogheda, Co Louth, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [3935/DT101/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Padraig Duffy (respondent solicitor) On 22 April 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to honour an undertaking dated 4 February 2001 given to the complainant under cover of letter dated 16 February 2001 to, as soon as practicable, complete and lodge with the respondent solicitor's client's branch of the bank a report and certificate of title in the bank's standard form, together with all documents constituting the bank's security, and also all the title documents or other documentary evidence evidencing the respondent solicitor's client's title to the property, including, in the case of registered land, the original land certificate and the original deed of charge with certificate of charge endorsed thereof under rule 156 of the Land Registry Rules 1972, b) Failed to honour an undertaking given to the complainant, dated 4 February 2001 and sent under cover of letter dated 16 February 2001, whereby he undertook, pending compliance with the above paragraph and where the bank was taking a first mortgage/charge, to hold the title documents in trust for the bank, c) Failed to honour an undertaking dated 4 February 2001, sent to the complainant under cover of letter dated 16 February 2001, whereby he confirmed he was in sufficient funds to cover stamp duty and all other necessary outlays for the transaction, and to confirm that he had obtained his client's irrevocable authority to give this undertaking, d) Failed to reply adequately or in some cases at all to the complainant's correspondence, in particular letters dated 4 March 2003, 15 April 2003, 1 May 2003, 12 May 2003, 21 May 2003, 10 September 2003, 22 March 2004, 30 August 2005, 13 September 2005, 21 September 2005 and 3 May 2006 respectively, e) Failed to reply adequately or in some cases at all to the Society's correspondence, in particular letters dated 28 September 2006, 27 October 2006, 5 February 2007, 14 January 2008, 15 February 2008, 16 June 2008, 2 July 2008, 15 July 2008 and 9 September 2008 The tribunal directed that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €10,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witness expenses, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Patrick E Moran

Moran Solicitors, 33 Pearse Street, Dublin 2

20 April 2010

In the matter of Patrick E Moran, a solicitor practising as Moran Solicitors, 33 Pearse Street, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [10159/DT122/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick E Moran (respondent solicitor) On 20 April 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2008 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001), in a timely manner, b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligations to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Patrick G Enright

Lees Solicitors, 45 Church Street, Listowel, Co Kerry

6 April 2004

In the matter of Patrick G Enright, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Lees Solicitors at 45 Church Street, Listowel, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [5353/DT345] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick G Enright (respondent solicitor) On 6 April 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to protect his client's interest in a timely manner or at all b) Failed to communicate with his clients c) Failed to progress proceedings on behalf of a minor client although instructed in 1993 to do so d) Failed to respond to the society's correspondence e) Failed to attend at the Registrar's Committee meetings on 13 December 2001 and on 30 April 2002, despite being requested to do so f) Failed to comply with a notice issued pursuant to section 10(1) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 in the time specified in that notice g) Up to the date of swearing of the society's affidavit, sworn 10 July 2002, failed to comply with the direction of the Registrar's Committee made pursuant to section 8 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1994 to hand over the file to the complainant The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay the sum of €3,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, measured at €4,000 and agreed by the parties The said sum of €4,000 to be paid within a period of three months from the date of the order

Patrick G Enright

Lees Solicitors, 45 Church Street, Listowel, Co Kerry

6 April 2004

In the matter of Patrick G Enright, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Lees Solicitors at 45 Church Street, Listowel, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [5353/DT368] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick G Enright (respondent solicitor) On 6 April 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to reply to correspondence from the society and in particular its letters of 15 January 2002, 29 January 2002, 11 February 2002, 22 February 2002, 8 March 2002, 23 April 2002, 3 May 2002, 7 June 2002 and 24 June 2002 b) Failed to attend at the Registrar's Committee meetings on 19 March 2002 and 30 April 2002, despite being requested to do so c) Failed to comply with the directions of the Registrar's Committee on 30 April 2002 to transmit his file to his client in a timely manner or at all d) Failed to respond to a section 10 notice served on him by the society in a timely manner e) Failed to take steps to process the complainant's claim in a timely manner or at all f) Failed to respond to the complainant's query and correspondence and to keep her advised of the progress of her claim The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay the sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the sum of €1,000 to the Law Society of Ireland as measured by the tribunal and agreed by the parties The said sum of €1,000 to be paid within a period of three months from the date of this order

Patrick Gillespie

P Gillespie & Company, Solicitors, at Bury Street, Ballina, Co Mayo

23 November 2006

In the matter of Patrick Gillespie, a solicitor carrying on practice under the style and title of P Gillespie and Company, Solicitors, of Bury Street, Ballina, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6919/DT50/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick Gillespie (respondent solicitor) On 23 November 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with his undertaking dated 24 October 2003 to ACC Bank relating to sites 6 and 23 Brusna Court, Co Mayo, and in particular his obligation pursuant to that undertaking to register ACC's charge over the property; b) Is in breach of his letter of undertaking dated 4 November 2003 to ACC Bank relating to the sale proceeds of dwelling houses on sites 6 and 23 Brusna Court, Shanaghy, Ballina, Co Mayo, in that the solicitor paid the proceeds directly to his clients in breach of his undertaking; c) Failed to comply with his undertaking dated 9 July 2003 in respect of sites 8 and 22 Brusna Court, by failing to register the charge of ACC Bank over his clients' sites; d) Is in breach of his letter of undertaking dated 23 July 2003 to ACC Bank relating to the sale proceeds of houses constructed under number 8 and 22 Brusna Court, Shanaghy, Ballina, Co Mayo, by paying out the proceeds of same to his clients rather than lodging same with the bank in accordance with the terms of the undertaking; e) Is in breach of his undertaking dated 24 April 2004 in respect of sites 9-21 Brusna Court, Shanaghy, Co Mayo, by failing to register the charge of ACC over his client's properties in accordance with his undertaking; f) Failed to correspond with the bank, in particular the bank's letters of enquiry dated 23 September 2005, 17 October 2005, 20 October 2005, and 24 October 2005; g) Failed to correspond with the complainant on behalf of the bank, and in particular failed to respond to the letters of the complainant dated 8 November 2005 and 18 November 2005; h) Failed to correspond with the Society, and in particular failed to respond to the Society's letters dated 3 January 2006, 16 January 2006 and 26 January 2006 in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €15,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, or any other person appearing before them, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Patrick Gillespie

P Gillespie & Company, Solicitors, at Bury Street, Ballina, Co Mayo

12 June 2008

In the matter of Patrick Gillespie, a solicitor practising as P Gillespie & Company, Solicitors, at Bury Street, Ballina, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6919/DT43/07; High Court record no: 2008 no 47SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick Gillespie (respondent solicitor) On 12 June 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to comply with undertakings given to the complainant's firm, dated 14 May 2002, in a timely manner or at all and, as of the date of the referral to the disciplinary tribunal, two of the items set out in his undertaking to the complainant remain outstanding, b) Failed to comply with the notice served pursuant to the provisions of section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 and dated 2 April 2007 in a timely manner or at all, c) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence and, in particular, the Society's letters to the solicitor dated 20 June 2005, 1 July 2005, 12 July 2005, 24 November 2006, 7 December 2006, 19 December 2006, and 16 April 2007 in a timely manner or at all, d) Failed to attend a meeting of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee when required to do so The tribunal referred the matter forward to the High Court On 20 October 2008, the President of the High Court ordered: a) That the respondent solicitor should not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership, that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland, b) That the Law Society do recover the cost of the proceedings herein and the cost of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal when taxed and ascertained

Patrick Gillespie

P Gillespie & Company, Solicitors, at Bury Street, Ballina, Co Mayo

23 October 2008

In the matter of Patrick Gillespie, a solicitor practising as P Gillespie & Company, Solicitors, at Bury Street, Ballina, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6919/DT44/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick Gillespie (respondent solicitor) On 23 October 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Released funds of €182,900 furnished to him on 11 October 2006, which funds were to be held on trust pending the furnishing of completion documentation, without the consent of the complainant, b) Failed to respond to the complainant's correspondence, c) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence and, in particular, the Society's letters of 14 March 2007, 2 April 2007, 13 April 2007, 23 April 2007, 21 May 2007, 27 June 2007, 19 October 2007, 8 November 2007, 17 December 2007, d) Failed to comply with the High Court order dated 8 October 2007, which order directed the solicitor to respond appropriately to the Society's correspondence in relation to this complaint, e) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee at its meeting of 12 December 2007 to furnish a progress report to the Society on or before 15 January 2008, f) Failed to provide the closing documents to his colleague in a timely manner or at all, and in particular the premier certificate, which is still outstanding The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Patrick Gillespie

P Gillespie & Company, Solicitors, at Bury Street, Ballina, Co Mayo

26 February 2009

In the matter of Patrick Gillespie, a solicitor formerly practising as P Gillespie & Company, Solicitors, at Bury Street, Ballina, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [6919/DT108/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick Gillespie (respondent solicitor) On 26 February 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to issue proceedings on behalf of his client, notwithstanding having instructions to do so in 1997, and thereby allowed his client's case to become statute barred, b) Failed to inform his client of the correct position regarding her case and led her to believe that the matter was progressing when no proceedings had been issued at all, c) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence and, in particular, the Society's letters of 31 March 2008, 16 April 2008, 29 April 2008, 15 May 2008 and 17 June 2008, d) Failed to comply with a notice served pursuant to section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 and dated 31 March 2008 in a timely manner, having only complied with same on 23 July 2008 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Patrick Gillespie

P Gillespie & Company, Solicitors, at Bury Street, Ballina, Co Mayo

27 April 2010

In the matter of Patrick Gillespie, a solicitor formerly practising as P Gillespie & Company, Solicitors, at Bury Street, Ballina, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 [6919/DT45/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick Gillespie (respondent solicitor) On 27 April 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence, and in particular to the Society's letters dated 13 February 2007, 26 February 2007, 15 March 2007, 20 April 2007, 17 May 2007, 18 September 2007, 18 December 2007, b) Failed to inform the Society as to his progress/lack of progress in discharging his undertaking to IIB Homeloans, c) Failed to attend meetings of the committee of the Society, despite being requested to do so until the Society sought an order from the High Court compelling his attendance The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €3,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Patrick J Carney

Patrick Carney & Company, Solicitors, 29 Whitworth Road, Drumcondra, Dublin 9

3 March 2005

In the matter of Patrick J Carney, a solicitor carrying on practice as Patrick Carney & Company, Solicitors, at 29 Whitworth Road, Drumcondra, Dublin 9, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [7616/DT430/03] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick Carney (respondent solicitor) On 3 March 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to file an accountant's report with the society in respect of his financial year ended 31 December 2001 in a timely manner, having only filed same on 29 September 2003, in breach of the provisions of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations no 2 of 1984 as amended by regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 b) Failed to file an accountant's report with the society in respect of his financial year ended 31 December 2002 in a timely manner or at all, in breach of the provisions of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: i) Do stand censured ii) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland and of any person appearing before them as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Patrick J Gillespie

P Gillespie & Company, Solicitors, at Bury Street, Ballina, Co Mayo

18 October 2007

In the matter of Patrick J Gillespie, a solicitor carrying on practice under the style and title of P Gillespie and Company, Solicitors, of Bury Street, Ballina, Co Mayo, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6919/DT79/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick J Gillespie (respondent solicitor) On 18 October 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to furnish the following documentation relating to the administration of the estate of a named person and requested by the Society: i) The section 68 letter, ii) A copy of the bill of costs, iii) Copy statement of account, iv) Copy receipt for payment of capital acquisitions for and on behalf of a named beneficiary; b) Failed to account for interest on monies held by him in the named estate, which monies were due for payment to the named beneficiary pursuant to the provisions of SI 372 of 2004 (Solicitors (Interest on Clients' Monies) Regulations 2004); c) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence during the investigation of the complaint and, in particular, the Society's letters of 1 September 2005, 19 October 2005, 10 November 2005, 21 November 2005, 19 December 2005, 19 January 2006, 1 February 2006, 20 February 2006, 27 February 2006, 28 March 2006, 24 April 2006, 3 May 2006, 24 May 2006, 8 June 2006 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €2,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witnesses' expenses, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Patrick J Madigan

Madigans Solicitors, 167 Lower Kimmage Road, Dublin 6

25 March 2010

In the matter of Patrick J Madigan Senior, a solicitor practising as a consultant in Madigans Solicitors, 167 Lower Kimmage Road, Dublin 6, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [2046/DT15/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick J Madigan (respondent solicitor) On 25 March 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to pay beneficiaries the amounts due to them in a timely manner, b) Misled the Society in his letter of 7 December 2004 indicating that he had sent a cheque of €4,22275 to a named beneficiary, when this was not in fact done until June 2005 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor do stand admonished and advised The tribunal made no order in respect of monetary fine or the Law Society's costs Further, the tribunal, in making this order, was mindful of the fact that the respondent solicitor had made restitution in this matter in the following manner: a) Paying interest to the beneficiaries of the estate, b) Waiving his legal fees due by the estate, c) Refunding to the estate rent paid, d) Paying a fine to the Law Society of Ireland, e) Waiver of costs in the High Court appeal by the Law Society

Patrick J McGonagle

McGonagle Solicitors, 3rd Floor, 13 Parliament Street, Dublin 2

18 May 2010

In the matter of Patrick J McGonagle, a solicitor practising as McGonagle Solicitors, 3rd Floor, 13 Parliament Street, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2008 [5843/DT135/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick J McGonagle (respondent solicitor) On 18 May 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor, in that he failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2008 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Patrick Mann

Patrick Mann & Company at 25, 26 and 27 Ashe Street, Tralee, Co Kerry

29 April 2004

In the matter of Patrick Mann, solicitor, practising as Patrick Mann & Company at 25, 26 and 27 Ashe Street, Tralee, Co Kerry, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [3806/DT432] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick Mann (respondent solicitor) On 29 April 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Allowed a surplus to arise in the client account of €251,476 due to the existence of deposit interest of €126,306 and the solicitor's own funds of €146,623 in the client account reduced by debit balances totalling €21,453, as highlighted in the report of the Law Society's accountant dated 7 November 2002 b) Allowed client balances containing a large element of solicitor/client fees undrawn and unpaid third party outlay to arise, as highlighted in the report of the Law Society's accountant dated 7 November 2002 c) Had undischarged third party outlay totalling €300,315 as set out in the report of the Law Society's accountant dated 7 November 2002, and subsequently paid out a total of €408,910 to third parties The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: 1) Do stand admonished 2) Pay a sum of €500 in respect of the findings of misconduct at (a) above; pay a sum of €500 in respect of the finding of misconduct at (b) above; pay a sum of €2,000 in respect of the finding of misconduct at (c) above 3) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland and of any person appearing before them as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Patrick Moran

2 Westland Square, Dublin 2

27 November 2007

In the matter of Patrick Moran, a solicitor of 2 Westland Square, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [10159/DT97/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Patrick Moran (respondent solicitor) On 27 November 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2005 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI 421 of 2001) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay a sum of €1,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement


Paul Derham

Daly Derham & Company, Solicitors, formerly of 32 Washington Street, Cork, now of 1a Washington Street West, Cork

17 July 2009

In the matter of Paul Derham, a solicitor of Daly Derham & Company, Solicitors, formerly of 32 Washington Street, Cork, now of 1a Washington Street West, Cork, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002, pursuant to an application by a former client of the respondent solicitor On 18 October 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that there had been misconduct on the part of the respondent solicitor in his practice as a solicitor in respect of the following complaints: a) Delayed handing over of the applicant's file to the applicant's new solicitors, and b) Failed to deal with the Law Society's correspondence in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Be advised and admonished, b) Pay a sum not exceeding a gross sum of €3,500 in respect of the applicant's expenses incurred in attending before the tribunal, with a credit for IRε£1,000 that a partner in the respondent solicitor's firm gratuitously and honourably gave to the applicant in December 2002 The applicant appealed against the finding of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal that no prima facie case for enquiry was disclosed in respect of an allegation that the solicitor had failed to progress the case On 6 March 2006, the High Court affirmed the decision of the tribunal The applicant appealed the order of the High Court and, on 17 July 2009, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order of the High Court

Paul Dermot Scully

PD Scully & Co Solicitors, 9/11 Inns Court, Winetavern Street, Dublin 8

13 June 2006

In the matter of Paul Dermot Scully, a solicitor practising as PD Scully & Co Solicitors, 9/11 Inns Court, Winetavern Street, Dublin 8, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4558/DT51/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Paul Dermot Scully (respondent solicitor) On 13 June 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor had been guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to progress the personal injuries claim of the complainant; b) Failed to respond or communicate with the complainant about her case; c) Failed to reply to correspondence from the Society about the complaint; d) Failed to comply with a notice pursuant to section 10 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 to deliver the complainant's file to the Society for inspection; e) Failed to comply with a direction of the Society to hand over the complainant's file to the Society for onward transmission to the complainant's new solicitors; f) Failed to comply with the provisions of section 68(1) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994; g) Through his conduct, prevented the Society from providing a solution to the complainant's situation; h) Through his conduct, showed a disregard for the statutory responsibilities of the Society in dealing with complaints; i) Through his conduct, showed a disregard for the Society as the statutory regulatory body of the solicitors' profession The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €15,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, and witnesses' expenses, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Paul Dermot Scully

PD Scully & Co Solicitors, 9/11 Inns Court, Winetavern Street, Dublin 8

13 June 2006

In the matter of Paul Dermot Scully, a solicitor practising as PD Scully & Co Solicitors, 9/11 Inns Court, Winetavern Street, Dublin 8, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4558/DT52/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Paul Dermot Scully (respondent solicitor) On 13 June 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor had been guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to progress two personal injuries claims of the complainant; b) Failed to respond or communicate with the complainant about his cases; c) Failed to reply to correspondence from the Society about the complaint; d) Failed to comply with a direction of the Society to hand over the complainant's file to the Society for onward transmission to the complainant so that he could instruct a new solicitor; e) Through his conduct, prevented the Society from providing a solution to the complainant's situation; f) Through his conduct, showed a disregard for the statutory responsibilities of the Society in dealing with complaints; g) Through his conduct, showed a disregard for the Society as the statutory regulatory body of the solicitors' profession The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the sum of €15,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, and any witnesses' expenses, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Peter Fortune

Peter M Fortune & Co Solicitors, at 38 Molesworth Street, Dublin 2

26 April 2004

the president the High Court: in the matter of Peter Fortune, solicitor, formerly practising under the style and title of Peter M Fortune & Co Solicitors, at 38 Molesworth Street, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [2003 no 33 SA] On 26 April 2004, the president of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of Peter Fortune be struck off the roll of solicitors 2) That the said Peter Fortune do pay to the society its costs of the proceedings before the Disciplinary Tribunal and also the costs of and incident to the application to the High Court, to be taxed in default of agreement, and that execution on foot thereof be stayed for a period of four months from the date of the order 3) That the Law Society be at liberty to re-enter the matter in relation to the question of restitution by the said Peter Fortune The president had before him the report of the Disciplinary Tribunal to the High Court, dated 12 December 2002 Reference to 'society' refers to the Law Society of Ireland Reference to 'regulations' refers to the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations No 2 of 1984 (SI no 304 of 1984) The said report recorded the following findings of misconduct against the said Peter Fortune in his practice as a solicitor, in that he had: a) Failed to disclose the existence of a judgment against him in his application for a practising certificate for the period 6 January 1993 to 5 January 1994 b) Breached regulation 21(1) in failing to file an accountant's report covering his financial year ended 30 April 1992 within the period prescribed by the said regulation c) Failed to keep proper books of account in breach of regulation 10 d) Misrepresented to the Compensation Fund Committee at its meeting on 17 June 1993 that there would be no shortfall in client funds when his books of account were written up e) Failed to lodge clients' funds to the client account, as evidenced by the qualifications attaching to his reporting accountant's report dated 24 March 1993, in breach of regulation 3 f) Drew monies from the client account in excess of funds held for the time being in such account, causing the client bank account to go into overdraft as set out at paragraph 24 of the society's investigation report, dated 7 May 1993, in breach of regulation 7 g) Failed to comply with a direction of the Compensation Fund Committee of 13 May 1993 that his books of account were to be written up to date within two weeks of the date of that meeting h) Failed to reply to correspondence from the society's investigating accountant and the registrar of solicitors in respect of the writing-up of his books of account i) Breached the terms of a consent order of the High Court, made on 23 July 1993, in failing to discharge the amount of ε£39,89088, necessitating the initiation of contempt proceedings against him by the society j) By his own admission, utilised client monies to fund the day-to-day running of his solicitor's practice k) By his own admission, admitted the misappropriation of the monies of a client in the amount of ε£2,500 l) Breached a solicitor's undertaking to the Bank of Ireland to discharge a sum of ε£2,500 to the bank on completion of a conveyancing transaction m) Failed to account to the Bank of Ireland for the sum of ε£2,500 in respect of the said conveyancing transaction, causing the society to have to pay the sum of ε£2,500 to the bank out of its compensation fund n) Understated in his books of account the amount received and held by him in respect of the said conveyancing transaction by the amount of ε£1,500 o) Failed to stamp and register a purchase deed in relation to the purchase of a property by a client, notwithstanding receipt of ε£3,990 for stamp duty and a further sum of ε£26 in respect of registration p) Failed to account to the client in respect of the monies referred to at (o) above q) Failed to account to the client referred to at (o) above or her estate for a further sum of ε£10915 r) Caused the society, in respect of the transaction at (o) above, to have to pay out of its compensation fund the sum of ε£4,15115 in respect of the estate of the client referred to at (o) above s) Failed to account to two clients for the sum of ε£10,978 received on their behalf for the purpose of stamping and registration deeds of purchase and mortgage t) Caused the society to have to pay out of its compensation fund to the clients referred to at (s) above the amount of ε£10,978 u) Failed to stamp and register a purchase deed and mortgage on behalf of a client, notwithstanding the receipt of a total of ε£11,002 in respect of such stamping and registration v) Failed to account to his client for the sum of ε£11,09405 received from them, causing the society to have to make a payment out of its compensation fund of ε£11,09405 In relation to the allegation that the respondent solicitor had caused a substantial deficit in client monies resulting in claims totalling ε£169,230 being admitted by the society on its compensation fund, the respondent solicitor was found guilty of professional misconduct in respect of the amount agreed at ε£39,89088

Peter Gerard McDonnell

Peter McDonnell & Associates, Fitzwilliam Hall, Suite GO2, Fitzwilliam Place, Dublin 2

21 April 2009

In the matter of Peter Gerard McDonnell, a solicitor practising under the style and title of Peter McDonnell & Associates at Fitzwilliam Hall, Suite GO2, Fitzwilliam Place, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4103/DT82/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Peter Gerard McDonnell (respondent solicitor) On 21 April 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Lodged clients' monies to the office account, in breach of regulation 4, b) Caused a deficit of approximately €300,000 on clients' accounts as of 30 April 2006 because of his failure to lodge clients' monies to clients' accounts, c) Wrote cheques on office accounts in payment of third-party outlays, but these cheques were not released for payment, so these amounts due on behalf of clients were not obvious from a review of clients' ledger accounts, d) Placed letters on clients' files, which gave the impression that the amounts had been paid to various barristers, engineers, etc, in breach of regulation 12, e) Failed to keep proper books of account, as required by regulation 12, f) Failed to have the original of each paid cheque drawn on clients' accounts, in breach of regulation 20(f), g) Failed to have available copies of the balancing statements for the client account, in breach of regulation 12 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €15,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Peter Jones

Peter D Jones & Co Solicitors, Church Lane, Mullingar, Co Westmeath

11 March 2010

In the matter of Peter Jones, a solicitor of Peter D Jones & Co Solicitors, Church Lane, Mullingar, Co Westmeath, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [3976/DT16/09] Named client of the respondent solicitor (applicant) Peter Jones (respondent solicitor) On 11 March 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to register the applicant's ownership of sites since 2004 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €4,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay 50% of the costs of the applicant, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Raymond Jameson

Jameson & Company, Fitzwilliam Square, Wicklow

29 November 2004

In the matter of Raymond Jameson, solicitor, practising as Jameson & Company, Fitzwilliam Square, Wicklow, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [6806/DT436] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Raymond Jameson (respondent solicitor) On 24 September 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that had: a) Failed to file an accountant's report with the Law Society of Ireland within six months of his accounting date of 30 April 2002, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations no 2 of 1984 b) Created multiple debit balances, in breach of regulation 7(2)(a) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 c) Maintained books of accounts that were six months in arrears, in breach of regulation 12(2)(a) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 d) Failed to comply with one of the conditions laid down by the Compensation Fund Committee on 10 July 2003, which was a prerequisite for the granting of an adjournment in that he failed to clear the deficit on his client account within seven days e) Allowed a representation to be made in a letter to the society dated 2 September 2003 that the deficit identified by his reporting accountant had been cleared when it had not f) Failed to discharge a further deficit of €238,739 by close of business on 2 September 2003, notwithstanding the representation made to the society to this effect in a letter to the society dated 2 September 2003 g) Failed to retain a deposit of ε£6,000 received in March 2000 until October 2001 when the sale closed h) Used other client monies to pay expenses and the beneficiaries of an estate i) Created a debit balance in relation to the client account of the estate in the amount of ε£60,000 or €76,18424, in breach of regulation 7(2)(a) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations no 2 of 1984 j) Lodged sale proceeds of €76,18428 relating to a named estate (being the euro equivalent of ε£60,000), being client monies, to the office account in February 2002, in breach of regulation 4(1) and regulation 6(4)(a) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 k) Failed to hold the deposit received in respect of the above sale until the transaction was closed l) Used other client monies totalling €108,01469 to make a distribution in a named estate on 6 December 2002 m) Advanced other client monies totalling €333,000 to a client builder on 14 April 2003 n) Failed to create and maintain a ledger account for his client builder, in breach of regulation 12(1) and (2)of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 o) Advanced other client monies of €146,027 to the vendor of a property on behalf of his client purchaser p) Was six months in arrears with the writing-up of the client account, in breach of regulation 12(2)(a) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 q) Retained a number of old balances on the client ledger account, which included fees, in breach of regulation 5(2) and 5(4) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 r) Failed to maintain separate ledger accounts for each client matter, in breach of regulation 12(3)(a) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 s) Failed to procure from his bank the return of paid cheques drawn on the client account, in breach of regulation 20(1)(f) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 The tribunal reported to the High Court, and on 29 November 2004 the president of the High Court ordered that: i) The name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the roll of solicitors ii) The respondent solicitor do make delivery to any person appointed by the applicant of all or any of the documents in the possession, control or within the procurement of the solicitor arising from his practice as a solicitor iii)The respondent solicitor do pay to the applicant the costs of the application and the costs of the proceedings before the Disciplinary Tribunal, such costs to be taxed in default of agreement


28 Octobe

Robert Sweeney

2 Crerand House, Larkins Lane, Letterkenny, Co Donegal

15 July 2010

In the matter of Robert Sweeney, a solicitor practising as Robert Sweeney at 2 Crerand House, Larkins Lane, Letterkenny, Co Donegal, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2008 [10658/DT29/10] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Robert Sweeney (respondent solicitor) On 15 July 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor, in that he failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 May 2009 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Seamus Mallon

Traynor Mallon Solicitors, 86 Clanbrasil Street, Dundalk, Co Louth

10 June 2004

In the matter of Joseph Traynor, solicitor, and Seamus Mallon, solicitor, practising as Traynor Mallon Solicitors and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [5554-3936/DT417] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Joseph Traynor (first-named respondent solicitor) Seamus Mallon (second-named respondent solicitor) On 10 June 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the first-named respondent solicitor and the second-named respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in respect of the following complaints set out in paragraph 14 of the affidavit of Patrick Joseph Connolly, sworn 7 August 2003, in that they: a) Allowed a deficit to arise in respect of client funds as of 30 November 2002 in the sum of €126,167, increasing as of 31 December 2002 to €250,693 b) Allowed this deficit to so arise in the practice of withdrawing costs from the client account in round sum amounts and failing to record these withdrawals in the ledger accounts of the clients concerned in breach of regulation 12(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 c) Failed to keep proper books of account in breach of regulation 12(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, thereby masking the deficit which was not readily apparent from the books of account that were presented to the investigating accountant d) Allowed the client bank account to be overdrawn on a number of occasions, as set out in paragraph 214 of the investigating accountant's report dated 7 February 2003 e) Allowed debit balances on the client ledger to occur on the client ledger account, as set out in the investigating accountant's report dated 7 February 2003 and in particular paragraph 215 to 219 thereof The existence of debit balances on the client ledger is in breach of regulation 7(1) and 7(2) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 The tribunal ordered that: a) The first-named respondent solicitor, Joseph Traynor, and the second-named respondent solicitor, Seamus Mallon, do stand censured b) The first-named respondent solicitor, Joseph Traynor, pay to the compensation fund a sum of €3,000 in respect of each of the charges, that is, a total of €15,000 c) The second-named respondent solicitor, Seamus Mallon, pay to the compensation fund a sum of €1,000 in respect of each of the charges, that is, €5,000 d) The first-named respondent solicitor and the second-named respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Sean A Mulvihill

Moynihan Mulvihill & Co 6 Cornmarket Street, Cork

22 April 2004

In the matter of Damian P Moynihan and Sean A Mulvihill, solicitors, formerly carrying on practice under the style and title of Moynihan Mulvihill & Co at 6 Cornmarket Street, Cork, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [S8171/S8208/DT] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Damian P Moynihan (first respondent solicitor) Sean A Mulvihill (second respondent solicitor) Reference to 'regulation' is a reference to the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (no 2) of 1984, statutory instrument no 304 of 1984 On 12 July 2004, the president of the High Court made an order that the name of the first respondent solicitor, Damian P Moynihan, be struck off the roll of solicitors The president had before him the report of the Disciplinary Tribunal dated 18 May 2004 in which the tribunal found that the first-named respondent had been guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: i) Failed to maintain proper books of account in breach of regulation 10 so that there was uncertainty as to the true position in respect of client funds ii) Failed to enter full details, and in some cases failed to enter any details at all, on cheque stubs and lodgment stubs in breach of regulation 19(1)(c) iii) Failed to enter virtually any information in the books of account as to the sources of money received and details of cheque payees in breach of regulation 19(1)(c) iv) Created debit balances on the client account in breach of regulation 7 v) Allowed a deficit to arise in client monies which stood at ε£31,805 as at 8 October 2001 and which subsequently rose to ε£56,662 in breach of regulation 7 vi) Failed to disclose the misappropriation of client monies of ε£7,500 vii) Misled the reporting accountant by leading him to believe that a sum of ε£7,500 introduced into the client account in 2001 was to clear a deficit arising in the financial practice year end 31 December 2000 when in fact it related to the misappropriation of monies by Mr Moynihan in July 2001 to purchase a car viii) Misled the Compensation Fund Committee on 6 December 2001, representing to the committee that the sum of ε£7,500 had been introduced into the client account to clear a deficit arising in the financial practice year end 31 December 2000 when in fact it related to the misappropriation of monies by Mr Moynihan in July 2001 to purchase a car ix) Advanced approximately ε£10,000 of clients' monies to a client when these monies did not stand to the credit of that client and therefore advanced to him other client monies in breach of regulation 7 x) Concealed from the society and the reporting accountant the misappropriation of ε£7,500 by Mr Moynihan xi) Failed to file the accountant's report covering the firm's financial year ended 31 December 2000 within six months of the accounting date in breach of regulation 21(1) The tribunal further found that there had been misconduct on the part of the first-named respondent solicitor, Damian P Moynihan, in that he: a) Misappropriated ε£7,500, being stamp duty and outlay received from a client b) Falsified the books of account to conceal his misappropriation of client monies c) When questioned about the matter, untruthfully stated that the deed had been stamped d) Falsely stated to the Compensation Fund Committee at its meeting on 4 October 2001 that ε£15,000 had been introduced into the client account to clear the deficit when no such monies, or any monies, had been paid into the client account e) Untruthfully advised the society's accountant that an army deafness case had been settled for ε£47,500 and that the settlement cheque was awaited when the case had not in fact been settled f) Advanced ε£10,615 and ε£15,357, totalling ε£25,972, to the client, the claimant in the army deafness case referred to at (e), when there were no monies to the credit of the client and thereby advanced other clients' monies to him g) Forged his partner's name on the cheque for ε£15,357 advanced to the client in the army deafness case referred to at (f) above h) Falsely represented to the credit union of the client referred to at (e) and (f) above in a letter of undertaking that the client's case had been settled for ε£47,500 i) Caused his client's credit union to advance ε£20,000 on foot of the false representation referred to at (g) above j) Allowed a further undertaking to be given to the said credit union by Mr Mulvihill causing the said credit union to advance a further ε£12,000 k) Falsely represented to the practice's reporting accountant that a loan of ε£7,500 was lodged to the client account to clear a deficit identified by the reporting accountant for the practice year ended 31 December 2000 l) Falsely represented to the society that he had obtained a loan of ε£7,500 which was to be paid into the client account to rectify the deficit in this amount caused by his own misappropriation m) Forged and uttered a document purporting to be an order of the District Court contrary to sections 3 and 6 of the Forgery Act 1913 On 22 April 2004, the Disciplinary Tribunal found the second-named respondent solicitor, Sean A Mulvihill, guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to maintain proper books of account in breach of regulation 10, so that there was uncertainty as to the true position in respect of client funds b) Failed to enter full details, and in some cases failed to enter any details at all, on cheque stubs and lodgment stubs in breach of regulation 19(1)(c) c) Failed to enter virtually any information in the books of account as to the sources of money received and details of cheque payees in breach of regulation 19(1)(c) d) Created debit balances in breach of regulation 7 e) Allowed a deficit to arise in client monies which stood at ε£31,805 as at 8 October 2001 and which subsequently rose to ε£56,662 in breach of regulation 7 f) Failed to disclose the misappropriation of client monies by the first-named respondent solicitor of ε£7,500 g) Advanced approximately ε£10,000 of clients' monies to a client when these monies did not stand to the credit of that client and therefore advanced to him other client monies in breach of regulation 7 h) Failed to file an accountant's report covering the firm's financial year ended 31 December 2000 within six months of the accounting date, in breach of regulation 21(1) The tribunal made an order in respect of the second-named solicitor as follows: a) Censuring the respondent solicitor b) Directing the respondent solicitor to pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master

Sean Acton

Michael McDarby & Company, Solicitors, Glebe Street, Ballinrobe, Co Mayo

18 September 2008

In the matter of Michael McDarby and Sean Acton, solicitors practising under the style of Michael McDarby & Company, Solicitors, Glebe Street, Ballinrobe, Co Mayo, and in the matter of an application by a named client of the respondent solicitors to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4200-7533/DT31/07] A named client of the respondent solicitors (applicant) Michael McDarby (first-named respondent solicitor) Sean Acton (second-named respondent solicitor) On 18 September 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitors guilty of misconduct in their practice as solicitors in respect of the following complaints set out in the affidavit of the applicant sworn on 22 February 2007: a) The applicant subsequently engaged Sean Acton, of Michael McDarby & Co to pursue her civil action arising out the damage to her vehicle and injuries sustained in the accident The applicant was not aware, nor did Sean Acton make her aware, that his partner, Michael McDarby, in the firm of solicitors Michael McDarby & Co was or had already acted for one of the other parties involved in the accident The applicant believes he should have told her, and she believes that he should have been aware of that fact, as there is a duty and responsibility on him to know those things He had advised her to plead in the District Court to careless driving and had represented her in that court and obtained a full booklet of statements from the gardaεΥ at that time, and the applicant cannot believe or see how either he or his partner Michael McDarby could not be aware of that fact b) The applicant believes that the first thing Michael McDarby would have done in representing the other party is to obtain the booklet of statements from the gardaεΥ, and there wouldn't be much point in obtaining statements from the gardaεΥ if her solicitor, Sean Acton, in the same office, had already obtained them Furthermore, the applicant believes that it would be necessary for Michael McDarby to ascertain what transpired in the District Court and how the prosecution against her had concluded The applicant finds it difficult to believe that, in making those enquiries, he would not have ascertained that his partner, Sean Acton, had acted for her in the District Court and hence he would have been aware that there was a clear conflict of interest in members of his solicitors' firm acting for two sides of proceedings arising out of the same traffic accident, where it was obvious that a conflict of interest not alone had, but would, arise c) Not alone did Sean Acton act for the applicant in the criminal case, but he was also pursuing a civil action at the same time as his partner Michael McDarby was pursuing a civil action for another party involved in the same action The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitors: a) Stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay 25% of the costs of the applicant as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Sean Allen

Sean Allen & Company, Solicitors, 67 Pembroke Road, Dublin 4

11 January 2005

In the matter of Sean Allen, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Sean Allen & Company, Solicitors, at 67 Pembroke Road, Dublin 4, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [4212/DT367] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Sean Allen (respondent solicitor) On 11 January 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Allowed a deficit of ε£87,918 to arise in his client account as of 31 May 2001 b) In relation to the case of a named client, the solicitor, as recorded on the client ledger account, allowed a number of payments to be applied against a deposit of ε£46,000 received in respect of the sale of a property, which money was to be held by him as stakeholder resulting in a debit balance of ε£18,72170 on this account c) Allowed a debit balance of ε£9,47243 in the estate ledger account of a named deceased client since 11 June 1998 d) Allowed a debit balance of ε£13,72547 to be recorded in the estate of a named deceased client since February 2001 e) Allowed a debit balance of ε£22,01267 to be recorded on a miscellaneous ledger account at the commencement of the investigation f) Withdrew six client account cheques which were not allocated to any particular client, in breach of regulation 10 of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations no 2 of 1984 Three of these cheques totalling ε£11,000 were made payable to the solicitor g) Engaged in a practice of transferring fees in round sum amounts to the office account, resulting in many cases in over-transfers to the office account, thereby causing debit balances in client ledger accounts in breach of regulation 7 of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations no 2 of 1984 h) Failed to file his accountant's report in respect of his financial year ended 31 May 2000 until 16 January 2001 instead of 30 November 2000 i) Failed to file his accountant's report in respect of his financial year ended 31 May 2001 until 26 April 2002 instead of 30 November 2001 j) Failed to keep proper books of account in breach of regulation 10(1)(a) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations k) Frustrated the investigating accountant's attempt to investigate his practice on a number of occasions The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €3,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Sean Allen

Sean Allen & Company, Solicitors, 67 Pembroke Road, Dublin 4

11 January 2005

In the matter of Sean Allen, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Sean Allen & Company, Solicitors, at 67 Pembroke Road, Dublin 4, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [4212/DT433/03] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Sean Allen (respondent solicitor) On 11 January 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to file an accountant's report for the year ended 31 May 2002 in a timely manner, having only filed same with the society by letter dated 9 May 2003 b) Filed a seriously qualified accountant's report for the year ended 31 May 2002 on 9 May 2003 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Sean Allen

Sean Allen & Company, Solicitors, 67 Pembroke Road, Dublin 4

14 May 2007

HIGH COURT 2007 No 37 SA In the matter of Sean Allen, a solicitor formerly practising as Sean Allen & Company, Solicitors, 67 Pembroke Road, Dublin 4, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4212/DT65/06, 4212/DT12/06, 4212/DT56/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Sean Allen (respondent solicitor) On 29 March 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: 4212/DT65/06: a) Failed to correspond with his client, the complainant, in a timely manner or at all in relation to his cases; b) Failed to respond to the Society's letters, and in particular the letters of (i) 1 November 2005, (ii) 14 November 2005, (iii) 6 December 2005; c) Failed to pay €250 levied by the Complaints and Client Relations Committee at its meeting of 30 November 2005; d) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee, at its meeting of 30 November 2005, to furnish a report on the complaint prior to the 18 January 2006 meeting; e) Failed to attend the meeting of 18 January 2006, despite being requested to do so 4212/DT12/06: a) Failed to pay a sum of €2,72250, which was received by him in or around August 2002 from named solicitors as a party-and-party cost, representing fees due to the complainant, in a timely manner or at all; b) Failed to respond to theSociety's correspondence in a timely manner; c) Failed to respond to 20 reminders sent by the complainant to the solicitor's firm 4212/DT56/06: a) Failed to stamp and register his client's title to a named property, despite same having been purchased on 22 March 2000 and having been put in funds to stamp and register same in a timely manner or at all; b) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence, and in particular to the Society's letters of 25 August 2005, 12 September 2005, 24 October 2005, 4 November 2005, 6 December 2005; c) Failed to attend at the Complaints and Client Relations Committee meeting on 18 January 2006, despite being requested to attend; d) Failed to discharge the levy of €250 imposed at the Complaints and Client Relations Committee meeting of 30 November 2005 On 14 May 2007, the President of the High Court ordered: a) That the respondent solicitor shall not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner and that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years' standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland; b) That the respondent solicitor pay a fine of €500 in respect of each of three complaints, totalling €1,500 fines to the compensation fund; c) That the respondent solicitor pay the costs of the proceedings before the disciplinary tribunal and the costs of the High Court proceedings

Sean Allen

Sean Allen & Company, Solicitors, 67 Pembroke Road, Dublin 4

26 February 2009

In the matter of Sean Allen, a solicitor formerly practising as Sean Allen & Company, Solicitors at 67 Pembroke Road, Dublin 4, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [4212/DT73/08] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Sean Allen (respondent solicitor) On 26 February 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Delayed in the administration of an estate following the death of a named person on 22 November 2000, b) Failed to respond to the Society's correspondence in the investigation of the complaint and, in particular, the Society's letters dated 1 November 2002, 28 November 2002, 16 December 2002, 13 January 2003, 30 January 2003, 12 February 2003, 10 March 2003, 4 March 2004, 24 March 2004, 22 June 2004, 2 July 2004, 8 September 2004, 7 October 2004, 18 October 2004, 15 November 2004, 15 July 2005, 27 July 2005, 24 August 2005, 6 September 2005, 23 September 2005, 17 October 2005 and 28 October 2005 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Sean Bourke

Sean Bourke, 29 Upper Fitzwilliam Street, Dublin 2

11 July 2005

Record no 2005 no 36 SA In the matter of Sean Bourke, a solicitor practising as Sean Bourke, 29 Upper Fitzwilliam Street, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Sean Bourke (respondent solicitor) On 11 July 2005, the president of the High Court ordered: 1) That the name of Sean Bourke, the respondent solicitor, be struck off the roll of solicitors; 2) That the respondent solicitor do pay to the applicant the costs of the proceedings before the Disciplinary Tribunal and also the costs of and incident to the society's motion and order, to be taxed in default of agreement, and that execution on foot of said order be stayed for a period of six months from the date of the order; 3) That the respondent solicitor do pay to the complainants named in the application to the High Court the costs of rectifying their title to the premises named in the application ̐ said costs to be taxed in default of agreement 4) Liberty to apply The president had before him the report of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal dated 4 May 2005 The tribunal had found that there had been misconduct on the part of the respondent solicitor in respect of the following complaints for the following reasons: a) Failed to stamp and register the purchase document of his clients in a timely fashion; b) Retained and did not submit to the Revenue a 'particulars delivered' form completed by the vendor's solicitor and showing that the date of the conveyance was 6 October 2000; c) Incorrectly dated the deed 16 October 2002 to avoid the imposition of interest and penalties by the Revenue Commissioners; d) Misled the society in a letter dated 24 April 2003, in which he represented that the deed of conveyance had been "fully stamped" when it had not; e) Failed to make full disclosure to his former clients in relation to his failure to properly stamp and register their title deed; f) Engaged in correspondence with the society which was disingenuous and calculated to conceal his own default in relation to the stamping and registration of his clients' deed; g) Failed to take steps to remedy the situation up to the date of the swearing of the affidavit of the society, sworn the 7 October 2003

Sean Grennan

Sean Grennan & Company, Solicitors, 32 North Main Street, Naas, Co Kildare

28 September 2006

In the matter of Sean Grennan, a solicitor of Sean Grennan & Company, Solicitors, 32 North Main Street, Naas, Co Kildare, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3381/DT18/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Sean Grennan (respondent solicitor) On 28 September 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 January 2005 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, SI no 421 of 2001; b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligations to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Sean McGlynn

Sean McGlynn & Company, Solicitors, Church Street House, Letterkenny, Co Donegal

24 May 2005

In the matter of Sean McGlynn, a solicitor of Sean McGlynn & Company, Solicitors, Church Street House, Letterkenny, Co Donegal, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [5520/DT474/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Sean McGlynn (respondent solicitor) On 24 May 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to file his accountant's report for the year ended 31 August 2003, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (statutory instrument no 421 of 2001), in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €2,500 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Sean McGlynn

Church Street House, Letterkenny, Co Donegal

28 September 2006

In the matter of Sean McGlynn, a solicitor, of Church Street House, Letterkenny, Co Donegal, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5520/DT78 /05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Sean McGlynn (respondent solicitor) On 28 September 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to ensure there was furnished to the Society a reporting accountant's report for the year ended 31 August 2004 within six months of his accounting date, as required by regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001; b) Through his conduct, showed disregard for his statutory obligations to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: i) Do stand censured, ii) Pay a sum of €5,500 to the compensation fund, iii) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement


Sean T O'Reilly

Sean T O'Reilly Solicitors, Bantry House, 2/3 Jocelyn Street, Dundalk, Co Louth

17 November 2005

In the matter of Sean T O'Reilly, a solicitor practising as Sean T O'Reilly Solicitors at Bantry House, 2/3 Jocelyn Street, Dundalk, Co Louth, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 [8657/DT18/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Sean T O'Reilly (respondent solicitor) On 17 November 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Misled his clients by issuing to them a cash account on 22 July 2004 indicating that he had settled their actions with the Bank of Ireland for €6,000 and with Bank of Ireland Finance for €6,000, when in fact those settlements were for €5,000 each; b) Misled his clients by advising them that the settlement reached with Bank of Ireland Credit Card Services was €1,800, when in fact that settlement was €1,200; c) Failed to explain the costs situation to his clients or to issue a section 68 letter in a timely manner or at all; d) Until challenged by the clients, the solicitor wrongfully withheld the difference between the actual settlement amount of €5,000 in two cases and €1,200 in a third case and the amount advised to his client of €6,000 in two cases and €1,800 in the third case The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €5,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland and any person appearing before the tribunal, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Shane M Allen

Allen & Associates, Main Street, Newtownmountkennedy, Co Wicklow

8 February 2007

In the matter of Shane M Allen, a solicitor practising as Allen & Associates, Main Street, Newtownmountkennedy, Co Wicklow, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [8094/DT64/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Shane M Allen (respondent solicitor) On 8 February 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he failed to hold purchase monies that were sent to him in trust until all outstanding documentation was handed over to the complainant's solicitor The tribunal, having been apprised of the substantial sum expended by the respondent solicitor in resolving this complaint, ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Sheila McConnell

Sheila McConnell & Company, Solicitors, 30 Main Street, Newbridge, Co Kildare

10 January 2006

In the matter of Sheila McConnell (otherwise Duff), a solicitor practising as Sheila McConnell & Company, Solicitors, at 30 Main Street, Newbridge, Co Kildare, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [7489/DT36/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Sheila McConnell (respondent solicitor) On 10 January 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor, Sheila McConnell, had been guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she breached regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (SI no 421 of 2001) in failing to ensure that there was furnished to the Law Society an accountant's report within six months of her financial year ended 30 June 2003 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay a sum of €500 towards the costs of the Law Society of Ireland

Stephen Maher

Stephen Maher Solicitors at 6 The Courts, Newbridge, Co Kildare

3 November 2005

In the matter of Stephen Maher, a solicitor practising as Stephen Maher Solicitors at 6 The Courts, Newbridge, Co Kildare, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 [5135/DT34/05] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Stephen Maher (respondent solicitor) On 3 November 2005, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that the solicitor breached regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations, SI no 421 of 2001, in failing to ensure that there was furnished to the society an accountant's report covering his financial year ended 30 July 2003 within six months thereafter, that is, by 31 January 2004 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand advised and admonished, b) Pay a sum of €1,500 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Thomas Byrne

Thomas Byrne & Co, 78 Walkinstown Road, Dublin 12

7 December 2006

In the matter of Thomas Byrne, a solicitor practising as Thomas Byrne & Co Solicitors, at 78 Walkinstown Road, Dublin 12, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6095/DT20/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Thomas Byrne (respondent solicitor) On 7 December 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Allowed a deficit of €1,696,969 on the client account as of 31 May 2005 b) In breach of regulation 7(2) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, the solicitor allowed debit balances to arise in the amount of €1,696,969 c) In the period 1 November 2004 to September 2005, the solicitor was in breach of regulation 12(1) by failing to maintain proper books of account During the period 1 June 2005 to October 2005, no ledger cards were maintained d) Breached regulation 20(1)(f), in that not all client account cheques were returned by the bank as identified by the solicitor's reporting accountant's report e) In breach of regulation 12(1), failed to ensure that receipts into and payments from the client bank account were supported by third party documentation f) Failed to transfer fees to which the solicitor was entitled to the office bank account within three months from the client account in breach of the regulations g) Failed to ensure that all inter-client transfers were supported by documentation on the file h) Allowed personal transactions of the solicitor himself to be drawn from the client bank account, where no cleared funds were held on his behalf The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay a sum of €15,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Thomas Byrne

Thomas Byrne & Co, 78 Walkinstown Road, Dublin 12

16 June 2008

In the matter of Thomas Byrne, a solicitor formerly practising under the style and title of Thomas Byrne & Co at 78 Walkinstown Road, Dublin 12, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [6095/DT60/06, 6095/DT36/08 and High Court record no 2008 no 52SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Thomas Byrne (respondent solicitor) On 20 February 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: 1) Failed to comply in a timely manner or at all with undertakings given to Allied Irish Banks plc, and failed to do so despite repeated requests for compliance by the bank, 2) Failed in particular to perfect the bank's security for the borrowings of his clients, in breach of the said undertakings, 3) Failed to furnish the bank with title documentation and/or mortgage deeds, in breach of the said undertakings, 4) Failed to furnish the bank with information regarding the perfection of the bank's security, and in particular information relating to the execution and registration of mortgage charges under the terms of the said undertakings, and failed to provide such information despite repeated requests from the bank, 5) Furnished the bank with misleading and/or erroneous information relating to the said undertakings, and in particular in relation to the registration of mortgage charges, 6) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee, as communicated to the respondent solicitor by letter of 28 July 2005, that he comply with the undertakings given to the bank, 7) Failed to comply with the direction of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee, as communicated to the respondent solicitor by letter of 28 July 2005, that he provide information relating to the undertakings given to the bank, as requested by the Law Society in its letter of 18 May 2005, by way of, in particular, a comprehensive response to the bank's letter of 1 March 2005 The tribunal ordered the Law Society to bring the report of the tribunal in respect of the respondent solicitor before the High Court, with recommendations that the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors and pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society, to be taxed in default of agreement On 22 May 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: 1) Fraudulently caused or permitted the signature of an assistant solicitor in his practice to be forged on an undertaking furnished to Irish Nationwide Building Society by his practice, dated 29 March 2007, 2) Fraudulently furnished/permitted to be furnished the said undertaking to Irish Nationwide Building Society, dated 29 March 2007, knowing that the signature thereon, which purported to be the signature of an assistant solicitor in his practice, had been forged, 3) Dishonestly obtained a loan for his own personal use and benefit from Irish Nationwide Building Society of in or about €4,545,000 on 30 March 2007 on foot of the said fraudulent undertaking furnished by him/his practice to the said building society, dated 29 March 2007, on his behalf as borrower, in circumstances where he caused or permitted the name of the signatory of the said undertaking to be forged, 4) Dishonestly represented to Irish Nationwide Building Society the authenticity of the said undertaking by furnishing the undertaking to them under cover of a letter dated 29 March 2007, signed by him, confirming that an assistant solicitor in his practice is an authorised signatory, in circumstances where he knew that the name of the purported authorised signatory of the said undertaking had been forged, 5) Failed to comply with the said undertaking given by his practice to Irish Nationwide Building Society, dated 29 March 2007, in respect of a loan to him in the amount of in or about €4,545,000, and in particular breached the terms of the undertaking by failing to ensure that he had good marketable title to the properties listed in the said undertaking as security for the loan, and further failed to execute, stamp and register charges against the properties in favour of Irish Nationwide Building Society, 6) Forged the signature of a solicitor in his practice on an undertaking furnished to EBS Building Society in respect of a loan to him of, in or about, €1 million secured/secured in part on 103 Clonard Road, Crumlin, Dublin 12, 7) Dishonestly caused or permitted undertakings to be given to two financial institutions, namely EBS Building Society and IIB Bank, secured in part on the same property, 103 Clonard Road, Crumlin, Dublin12, 8) Dishonestly repeatedly caused or permitted undertakings to be furnished by his practice to multiple financial institutions in respect of borrowings advanced by financial institutions to him/to him and a third party, secured on the same property/properties, 9) Abandoned his practice on or about 19 October 2007 in breach of his duty to his clients and without notification to his clients and/or the Law Society, 10) Dishonestly abandoned his practice on or about 19 October 2007 in circumstances where undertakings given by his practice to financial institutions in respect of loans advanced personally to him, and in respect of which loan monies had been drawn down, had not been complied with, 11) Prior to abandoning his practice, dishonestly removed files from the practice and, in particular, removed file BYT2010001 (described as relating to lands at Clonee, Co Meath), 12) Dishonestly obtained personal loans totalling in or around €21 million by causing or permitting undertakings to be furnished by his practice on his behalf to four financial institutions, namely Irish Nationwide Building Society, Anglo Irish Bank, IIB Bank and EBS Building Society, in respect of personal borrowings secured/secured in part on the same six properties, namely: 165 Cherrywood Drive, Clondalkin; 112 Grangeview Road, Clondalkin; 12 Grangeview Grove, Clondalkin; 15 Grangeview Lawn, Clondalkin; 32 Westbourne Avenue, Clondalkin; and 27 Westbourne Park, Clondalkin ('the six properties'), 13) Fraudulently failed to disclose to some/all of the aforesaid four financial institutions that undertakings had already been furnished to other financial institution(s) secured on the six properties, 14) Failed to comply in full with some/all of the said undertakings furnished to INBS, Anglo Irish Bank, IIB Bank and EBS Building Society in respect of the six properties, 15) Failed to comply with an undertaking given by his practice to INBS on or about 12 October 2006 in respect of monies advanced to him personally and secured in part on the six properties, 16) Failed to return title documentation in respect of the said six properties furnished to him by Anglo Irish Bank on trust on 5 September 2007, despite demand pursuant to the terms of accountable trust receipts given by/on behalf of his practice to the said bank, 17) Failed to comply with undertakings given by his practice to IIB, dated 6 September 2007, in respect of monies advanced to him in the amount of €9,000,000 and secured in part on the six properties, and in particular failed to submit title documentation to IIB in accordance with the terms of the said undertakings, 18) Failed to comply with an undertaking given by/on behalf of his practice, dated 25 June 2007, to EBS Building Society in respect of monies advanced to him in the amount of €3,000,000 and secured in part on the six properties, 19) Failed to comply with an undertaking given by/on behalf of his practice, dated 8 August 2007, to EBS Building Society in respect of monies advanced to him in the amount of €1,000,000 and secured in part on the six properties, 20) Failed to maintain adequate client and accounting records in respect of transactions involving 102 Boot Road, Clondalkin, Dublin 22 (102 Boot Road), 21) Dishonestly caused or permitted multiple undertakings to be given by his practice to numerous financial institutions secured/secured in part on 102 Boot Road, 22) Failed to comply with multiple undertakings given by his practice to financial institutions in respect of the borrowings of the respondent solicitor and/or third parties secured/secured in part on 102 Boot Road and failed in particular to register charges in favour of financial institutions against the said property, 23) Dishonestly gave an undertaking to ACC Bank on or about 22 April 2004 in respect of a loan to a client in the amount of in or around €1,000,000, secured in part on 102 Boot Road, in circumstances where the said client was not the owner of the said property and further failed to comply with the said undertaking by, in particular, failing to ensure the bank obtained a valid first legal mortgage on the property, 24) Dishonestly caused or permitted an undertaking to be given by his practice to EBS Building Society on or about 31 May 2004 in respect of a loan advanced to him in the amount of €945,000, secured in part on 102 Boot Road, in circumstances where he was not the owner of the said property and further in circumstances where he had given a prior and conflicting undertaking dated 22 April 2004 to ACC Bank in respect of a loan to a client and, further, failed to comply with the said undertaking to EBS Building Society and in particular failed to register a first legal mortgage against the property in favour of EBS Building Society, 25) Dishonestly caused or permitted an undertaking to be given on behalf of his practice to Irish Nationwide Building Society on 29 March 2007 in respect of a loan to him in the amount of in or about €4,545,000 and secured in part on 102 Boot Road in circumstances where prior undertakings given by his practice in respect of the property remained outstanding and further failed to comply with the terms of the said undertaking by failing to execute and register a first legal mortgage against the said property in favour of Irish Nationwide Building Society, 26) Dishonestly sought to mislead Irish Nationwide Building Society by writing to Irish Nationwide Building Society by letter dated 18 October 2007 undertaking to complete the certificate of title and to comply with the undertaking given to Irish Nationwide Building Society dated 29 March 2007, which referred to Irish Nationwide Building Society obtaining a first legal mortgage in respect of 102 Boot Road, knowing that similar undertakings had been given by his practice to ACC Bank and EBS Building Society and further in circumstances where he had personally secured a loan of €9 million secured in part on 102 Boot Road from IIB Bank on 7 September 2007 on foot of a further undertaking furnished by his practice, 27) Dishonestly offered 102 Boot Road as security for his personal borrowings, knowing that the property was the subject of multiple prior undertakings to other financial institutions, which remained outstanding, 28) Dishonestly obtained a loan from IIB Bank in the amount of €9,000,000 on or about 7 September 2007, secured in part on 102 Boot Road, on foot of an undertaking given by his practice to the said bank dated 6 September 2007 in circumstances where the property had previously been offered as security for loans from other financial institutions and in respect of which undertakings given by his practice to register charges against the property in favour of those financial institutions remained outstanding, 29) Dishonestly obtained a loan from Irish Nationwide Building Society in the amount of €4,545,000 on or about 30 March 2007, secured in part on 102 Boot Road, on foot of an undertaking given by his practice to the said bank dated 29 March 2007 in circumstances where the property had previously been offered as security for loans from other financial institutions and in respect of which undertakings given by his practice to register charges against the property in favour of those financial institutions remained outstanding, 30) Dishonestly obtained loans from Bank of Scotland in the amounts of €3,550,000 and €450,000, secured in part on 102 Boot Road, on or about 1 December 2004 on foot of an undertaking given by his practice to the said bank on 29 November 2004 in circumstances where the property had previously been offered as security for loans from other financial institutions and in respect of which undertakings given by his practice to register charges against the property in favour of those financial institutions remained outstanding, 31) Dishonestly obtained a loan from EBS Building Society in the amount of €945,000, secured in part on 102 Boot Road, on foot of an undertaking given by his practice dated 3 June 2004 in circumstances where the property had previously been offered as security for a loan to a third party from another financial institution and in respect of which an undertaking to register a charge given by his practice against the property in favour of that financial institution remained outstanding, 32) Failed to ensure the payment of stamp duty in respect of the sale of 102 Boot Road on or about 10 October 2002, 33) Failed to ensure the payment of stamp duty on time and within 30 days of the completion of the purchase of 102 Boot Road by a client on or about 4 August 2000, 34) Failed to maintain any or any proper records in relation to the payment of stamp duty on transactions involving 102 Boot Road, 35) Failed to maintain adequate client and accounting records in respect of transactions involving the property known as Otterbrook, Kilquade, Co Wicklow (Otterbrook), 36) Failed to ensure the payment of stamp duty on time and within 30 days of the completion of the purchase of Otterbrook by a client in or about November 2002, 37) Failed to maintain any or any adequate vouching documentation in respect of the payment of stamp duty in respect of the said purchase of Otterbrook by the same client, 38) Dishonestly caused or permitted multiple undertakings to be given by his practice to multiple financial institutions in respect of borrowings of the same client secured/secured in part on Otterbrook, in circumstances where prior and conflicting undertakings were outstanding and charges in favour of financial institutions were not registered against the said property, 39) Failed to comply with undertakings given by him in respect of loans advanced to the same client by ACC Bank (dated 12 August 2003 and 20 June 2007 ̐ loans of €746,21837 and €1 million), EBS Building Society (dated 28 May 2003 and 31 January 2005 ̐ loans of €1 million and €3 million) and Irish Nationwide Building Society (dated 20 December 2006 ̐ loan of €1,500,000) by failing to register first legal mortgages/charges in favour of the said financial institutions against Otterbrook in accordance with the terms of the said undertakings, 40) Dishonestly gave an undertaking to EBS Building Society, dated 26 June 2007, in respect of a loan to the same client in the amount of €1,500,000, secured in part on Otterbrook, in which he undertook to hold all documents of title on accountable trust receipt from EBS Building Society and to return all title documents to EBS Building Society as soon as possible or on demand, in circumstances where the said undertaking was in direct conflict with an undertaking he had given to ACC Bank six days earlier, dated 20 June 2007, by which he undertook to secure a first legal mortgage for ACC Bank against Otterbrook and hold all title documents in trust for ACC Bank, 41) Dishonestly gave undertakings to Ulster Bank Ireland Limited, dated 10 March 2004 and 1 April 2004, in respect of a loan advanced to the same client in the amount of in or about €1,400,000, secured in part on Otterbrook, by which his practice confirmed to the bank that the title to the said property was unencumbered and undertook if required to attend to the registration of a first legal charge of Ulster Bank Ireland Limited on the property, in circumstances where he/his practice had given prior undertakings to other financial institutions to register first legal mortgages against the said property, which remained outstanding, 42) Failed to maintain adequate client and accounting records in respect of transactions involving The Lodge (St Mary's), Blackberry Lane, Delgany, Co Wicklow (The Lodge), 43) Dishonestly caused or permitted multiple undertakings to be given by his practice to multiple financial institutions in respect of borrowings of a client secured/secured in part on The Lodge, in circumstances where prior undertakings remained outstanding and charges in favour of financial institutions were not registered against the said property, 44) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to EBS Building Society dated 31 January 2005 in respect of a loan advanced to the same client, secured in part on The Lodge, in the amount of €3 million and in particular failed to register a first legal mortgage/charge in favour of EBS Building Society against the said property in accordance with the terms of the said undertaking, 45) Dishonestly gave an undertaking to Ulster Bank Ireland Limited, dated 27 July 2007, in respect of loans advanced to the same client in the amounts of €1,400,000 and €1,300,000 and secured in part on The Lodge, in which he undertook to hold all documents of title for The Lodge to the order of Ulster Bank Ireland Limited pending completion of the sale of the property, in circumstances where the said undertaking was in direct conflict with an undertaking given by him to EBS Building Society, dated 26 June 2007, in respect of a loan advanced to the same client in the amount of €1,500,000, secured in part on The Lodge, by which his practice undertook to hold the documents of title for The Lodge on accountable trust receipt to EBS Building Society, 46) Failed to maintain adequate client and accounting records in respect of transactions involving 14 Liberty View, Pim Street, Dublin 8 (14 Liberty View), 47) Dishonestly caused or permitted multiple undertakings to be given by his practice to multiple financial institutions in respect of borrowings of a client secured/secured in part on 14 Liberty View, in circumstances where prior undertakings remained outstanding and charges in favour of financial institutions were not registered against the said property, 48) Failed to comply with an undertaking given by him, dated 22 September 2005, to National Irish Bank in respect of a loan advanced to the same client in the amount of €2 million and an overdraft facility in the amount of €2 million secured in part on 14 Liberty View, and in particular failed to register a first legal mortgage/charge against the said property in favour of National Irish Bank in accordance with the terms of the said undertaking, 49) Failed to comply with an undertaking given by him, dated 22 November 2005, to EBS Building Society in respect of a loan advanced to him personally in the amount of €1,607,000, secured in part on 14 Liberty View, and in particular failed to register a first legal mortgage/charge against the said property in favour of EBS Building Society in accordance with the terms of the said undertaking, 50) Dishonestly caused or permitted the undertaking dated 22 November 2005 to be given to EBS Building Society, which said undertaking required him to secure a first legal mortgage/charge on 14 Liberty View for EBS Building Society in circumstances where, eight days previously, his practice had given an undertaking to Bank of Scotland, dated 14 November 2005, in relation to a loan also secured in part on 14 Liberty View, by which his practice undertook not to do any act that would enable the property to be mortgaged or assigned without the consent of Bank of Scotland, 51) Dishonestly obtained a loan from EBS Building Society on or about 25 November 2005 in the amount of €1,607,000, secured in part on 14 Liberty View, in circumstances where he was not at that time the owner of the said property or, in the alternative, failed to maintain any client or accounting records in relation to the transfer of the property to him, 52) Dishonestly caused or permitted multiple undertakings (dated 22 November 2005, 31 January 2007, 25 June 2007 and 8 August 2007) to be given by his practice to EBS Building Society in relation to loans advanced to him personally and secured in part on 14 Liberty View, by which he undertook that a first legal mortgage would be registered in favour of EBS Building Society against the said property and further undertook that his practice would hold the documents of title on accountable trust receipt from EBS Building Society in circumstances where he knew/ought to have known that prior undertakings had been given by his practice in relation to the borrowings of a client also secured in part on 14 Liberty View, 53) Allowed continuing deficits on the client account of in or around €5,793,948 at 30 April 2006, in or around €6,867,015 at 31 July 2006 and in or around €7,085,276 at 31 August 2006, 54) Caused or permitted deficits to arise on the client account at 30 April 2006 through the use of client monies in a manner not permitted by the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations (the regulations), 55) Allowed a deficit on the client account of in or around €185,000 as of 31 May 2007, 56) Dishonestly sought to conceal/permit the concealment of the fact that a deficit had arisen on the client account as of 31 May 2007 and did so by causing or permitting the transfer of funds into the client account on or about 31 May 2007, which represented a date in respect of which an accounting report was required to be drawn up and filed with the Law Society, 57) Failed to ensure payment of stamp duty on transactions in respect of which his practice acted and/or failed to maintain proper client and accounting records of payment of stamp duty, 58) Caused or permitted flagrant and widespread breaches of the regulations in the keeping of the accounts of his practice, 59) Allowed debit balances to arise on the client account in the amount of approximately €185,000 at 31 May 2007, in breach of regulation 7(2)(a) of the regulations, 60) Used client monies in a manner not permitted by regulation 7 of the regulations, 61) Used client monies for his own personal use in breach of regulation 7(2)(b) of the regulations and/or used client monies for other clients and failed to properly account for such use, in breach of regulation 7(1)(a)(i) and 7(1)(a)(ii) of the regulations, 62) Failed to maintain adequate client and accounting records, in breach of regulation 12, and in particular in breach of regulation 12(1), 12(2), 12(3)(a) and 12(3)(b) of the regulations, 63) Used suspense accounts in breach of regulation 12(1) and 12(2) of the regulations, 64) Failed to maintain accounting records of each client matter and all documents generated in the course of each client matter, in breach of regulation 20(1)(h) of the regulations The tribunal ordered the Law Society to bring the report of the tribunal in respect of the respondent solicitor before the High Court, with recommendations that the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, pay a monetary penalty of €1,000,000, and pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society to be taxed in default of agreement On 16 June 2008, the President of the High Court ordered: i) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, ii) That the respondent solicitor pay a monetary penalty of €1,000,000 to the Law Society, and iii) That the Law Society recover from the respondent solicitor the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and the costs of the application to the High Court when taxed in default of agreement

Thomas Flood

Esmond Reilly Solicitors, Dargan House, Fenian Street, Dublin 2

10 February 2004

In the matter of Thomas Flood, carrying on practice under the style and title of Esmond Reilly Solicitors at Dargan House, Fenian Street, Dublin 2, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [4412/DT405] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Thomas Flood (respondent solicitor) On 10 February 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Failed to reply to his client's correspondence and enquiries b) Having been instructed by the High Court to retain furniture and personal belongings in safe keeping on behalf of the complainant, failed to explain how certain valuable items, all of them clearly listed, disappeared without explanation c) Failed to account to the complainant for items purchased by the solicitor, including a piano, hostess trolley and some other items d) Sold Irish Permanent plc shares held on behalf of the complainant without her authority or knowledge e) Furnished a share transfer form in respect of Irish Permanent plc shares bearing a signature that was not that of the complainant, without her authority or knowledge f) Cashed a cheque made payable to the complainant in the sum of ε£3,04360 without her authority or knowledge g) Failed to reply to the society's correspondence and in particular the society's letters of 4 April 2003, 17 April 2003, 28 April 2003 h) Failed to attend at the Registrar's Committee meeting on 6 May 2003, despite being requested to do so The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: 1) Do stand censured 2) Pay a sum of €15,000 to the compensation fund in respect of the complaints at paragraphs (a), (b), (d), (e), (f), (g) and (h) above 3) Pay a sum of €1,270 as restitution in respect of the piano and the hostess trolley to the complainant, without prejudice to any legal right of the complainant 4) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by the taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Thomas Flood

Esmond Reilly Solicitors, Dargan House, Fenian Street, Dublin 2

6 April 2004

In the matter of Thomas Flood, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Esmond Reilly Solicitors at Dargan House, Fenian Street, Dublin 2, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [4412/DT415] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Thomas Flood (respondent solicitor) On 6 April 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to reply to the correspondence of the society b) Failed to attend at the Registrar's Committee meetings c) Failed to respond to his client d) Failed to refund fees as directed by the Registrar's Committee in a timely manner The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €2,500 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Thomas Flood

Esmond Reilly Solicitors, Dargan House, Fenian Street, Dublin 2

21 June 2004

The High Court, 2004, no 1 SA In the matter of Thomas Flood, a solicitor carrying on practice under the style and title of Esmond Reilly, Solicitors, at Dargan House, Fenian Street, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Thomas Flood (respondent solicitor) On 21 June 2004, the president of the High Court made an order: 1) That Thomas Flood be restrained until further order from practising other than as an assistant solicitor in the employment of a solicitor of at least ten years' standing to be approved by the Law Society of Ireland and in the absence of such approval to be approved by the president of the High Court on notice to the said society 2) That for a period of five years at least from the date of the order, Thomas Flood be prohibited from giving any solicitor's undertaking on his own behalf or on behalf of any solicitor or firm by whom he might be from time to time employed 3) That Thomas Flood do pay to the society the costs of the society of the proceedings before the disciplinary tribunal and the High Court when taxed and ascertained, said costs to be taxed in default of agreement The president placed a stay on the order for a period of 28 days from the date of the order The president had before him three reports of the disciplinary tribunal In respect of case number 4412/DT402, the disciplinary tribunal had found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to the complainants on 15 November 2002 to deal with any Land Registry queries arising from the application of his clients for registration as owners of the folio and the complainants' clients' application for registration b) Failed to respond to the complainants' correspondence and in particular their letter of 16 December 2002 requesting that he furnish them with his clients' dealing number c) Failed to respond to correspondence from the society and in particular the society's letters of 26 February 2003, 11 March 2003, 24 March 2003 and 28 April 2003 c) Failed to attend at a Registrar's Committee meeting on 6 May 2003, despite being requested to do so In respect of case number 4412/DT404, the disciplinary tribunal had found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that: a) Up to the date of swearing of the society's affidavit on 12 August 2003, he failed to comply with an undertaking given on 30 July 1999 to forward an original deed of assignment dated 14 May 1997 duly stamped and registered in a timely manner or at all b) He failed to respond to multiple correspondence from the complainants c) He failed to respond to the society's correspondence d) He failed to attend at the Registrar's Committee meetings on a number of occasions, despite being requested to do so In respect of case number 4412/DT406, the disciplinary tribunal had found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that: a) Up to the date of swearing of the society's affidavit on 12 August 2003, he failed to comply with an undertaking dated 4 February 2002 in a timely manner or at all b) He failed to reply to the society's correspondence, in particular the society's letters of 20 March 2003, 3 April 2003 and 25 April 2003 c) He failed to attend at the Registrar's Committee meeting on 6 May 2003, despite being requested to do so

Thomas Flood

Esmond Reilly Solicitors, Dargan House, Fenian Street, Dublin 2

9 November 2004

In the matter of Thomas Flood, solicitor, practising as Esmond Reilly Solicitors at Dargan House, Fenian Street, Dublin 2, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954-2002 [4412/DT449/04] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Thomas Flood (respondent solicitor) On 9 November 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in that he had: a) Failed to account to the complainant or her clients for the sum of ε£35,000, which he acknowledged that he had received on their behalf by letter dated 11 July 2001 in a timely manner b) Failed to prepare a final cash account and bill of costs for the complainant in a timely manner c) Failed to discharge any balance owing to his client, the complainant, in a timely manner d) Failed to respond to the complainant's correspondence, and in particular to ten faxes and letters as detailed in the letter of complaint dated 11 July 2003 e) Failed to respond to the society's correspondence and in particular the society's letters of 30 July 2003, 13 August 2003 and 21 August 2003 The tribunal ordered that therespondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay a sum of €12,000 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Thomas Flood

2 The Gap, Barndarrig, Co Wicklow

6 March 2006

THE HIGH COURT 2006 No 7 SA In the matter of Thomas Flood, solicitor, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2002 Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Thomas Flood (respondent solicitor) On 6 March 2006, the president of the High Court, having considered and noted the solicitor's previous disciplinary findings, ordered: 1) That the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors; 2) That the ICS Bank and Ulster Bank shall furnish any information in its possession that the Society may require relating to any aspect of the financial affairs of the practice of the solicitor, with liberty to the Society to apply to the court for further orders relating to specified banks if necessary; 3) That the respondent solicitor swear an affidavit disclosing all information as to his assets, either in his possession or control or within his procurement, that have been, but are no longer, in his possession, control or within his procurement, and if no longer in his possession or control or within his procurement, his belief as to the present whereabouts of those assets, such affidavit to be sworn within four weeks of the date of this order; 4) That the respondent solicitor do pay to the applicant the costs of this application and the costs of the proceedings before the Disciplinary Tribunal, such costs to be taxed in default of agreement The president had before him the report of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal dated 27 September 2005 The tribunal had found that there had been misconduct on the part of the respondent solicitor in respect of the following complaints: a) Up to the swearing of the Society's affidavit, the respondent solicitor failed to register his clients as owners of their property, which was purchased in 1998, in a timely manner or at all; b) Failed to respond to correspondence from his clients and to explain the failure to register the said property in a timely manner or at all; c) In his letter of 5 November 2002 to his clients, inferred that their deed had been stamped when this was not in fact the position; d) Misled the Registrar's Committee on 17 December 2003 by telling them that duty had been paid on the deed when this was not in fact the position; e) Failed to comply with an undertaking given to the Registrar's Committee on 17 December 2003 to assist the clients' new solicitor in rectifying the matter; f) Failed to respond to correspondence from the Society, and in particular the Society's letters dated 27 November 2003, 4 December 2003, 19 December 2003, 19 January 2004, 25 February 2004, 21 April 2004, 10 May 2004 and 30 July 2004; g) Failed to comply with the direction made by the Registrar's Committee at its meeting on 24 March 2004 that he make a contribution of €500 towards the complainant's new solicitor's costs

Thomas K Murray

Ken Murray & Co Solicitors, 3 Oliver Plunkett Place, Midleton, Co Cork

27 April 2010

In the matter of Thomas K Murray, a solicitor practising as Ken Murray & Co Solicitors, 3 Oliver Plunkett Place, Midleton, Co Cork, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [5418/DT120/09] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Thomas K Murray (respondent solicitor) On 27 April 2010, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor, in that he failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2008 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand admonished and advised, b) Pay a sum of €750 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement

Thomas O'Donoghue

O'Donoghue & Co, 1 Temple Jarlath Court, High Street, Tuam, Co Galway

24 April 2006

THE HIGH COURT 2006 No 8 SA Monday 24 April 2006 In the matter of Thomas O'Donoghue, solicitor, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Thomas O'Donoghue (respondent solicitor) On 10 January 2006, the Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in that he failed to file an accountant's report with the Society, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (SI no 421 of 2001), since he commenced in practice on 6 June 2003 in a timely manner or at all The Disciplinary Tribunal ordered that the Law Society did bring such finding of the tribunal in respect of the respondent solicitor before the High Court together with the report of the tribunal to the High Court, which report includes the opinion of the tribunal as to the fitness or otherwise of the respondent solicitor to be a member of the solicitors' profession, having regard to their findings and recommendations in respect of the sanction that should be imposed in regard to their findings in respect of the respondent solicitor The President of the High Court on 24 April 2006, having read the findings of the Disciplinary Tribunal, their report, and noting that the outstanding accountant's report has now been attended to, ordered: a) That there be no order in relation to censure, b) That the solicitor be fined and that the fine be measured in the sum of €3,000, c) The appellant do recover their costs of the motion and order herein against the respondent solicitor when taxed and ascertained

Valentine A Kirwan

Kirwan & Company, 12 Herbert Place, Dublin 2

25 March 2004

In the matter of Valentine A Kirwan, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Kirwan & Company at 12 Herbert Place, Dublin 2, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [6158/DT412] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Valentine A Kirwan (respondent solicitor) On 25 March 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: Failed to file his accountant's report for the year ended 30 April 2002 in a timely manner or at all, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations no 2 of 1984 as amended by regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001 (statutory instrument no 421 of 2001) The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Is hereby advised b) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by the taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Valentine Stone

Val W Stone & Co Solicitors, at 14 North Main Street, Wexford

14 November 2006

In the matter of Valentine Stone, a solicitor practising as Val W Stone & Co Solicitors, at 14 North Main Street, Wexford, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [5869/DT30/06] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Valentine Stone (respondent solicitor) On 14 November 2006, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he was a party to a transaction that failed to disclose the full consideration of ε£250,000 on the face of it (having deliberately underestimated the actual consideration by ε£50,000), with the direct intention and effect of defrauding the Revenue Commissioners The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Pay the sum of €10,000 to the compensation fund, c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

Vivian C Matthews

Vivian C Matthews, 7 Main Street, Dundrum, Dublin 14

24 May 2004

In the matter of Vivian C Matthews, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Vivian C Matthews at 7 Main Street, Dundrum, Dublin 14, and in the matter of an application by the Law Society of Ireland to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [2652/DT387] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Vivian C Matthews (respondent solicitor) On 24 May 2004, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to apply for a practising certificate for the year 2003 in a timely manner, having only applied for same on 6 March 2003 b) Practised as a solicitor without a practising certificate for the period 1 January 2003 to 6 March 2003 in breach of the provisions of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: i) Do stand advised ii) Pay a sum of €500 to the compensation fund iii) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland to be taxed in default of agreement

William A Stokes

Herman Good & Company, Solicitors, 22/23 Dawson Street, Dublin 2

28 October 2008

In the matter of Elizabeth Farquharson, solicitor, and William A Stokes, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of Herman Good & Company, Solicitors, at 22/23 Dawson Street, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [3188-5032/DT83/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) Elizabeth Farquharson and William A Stokes (respondent solicitors) On 28 October 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the first-named respondent solicitor and the second-named respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in their practices as solicitors in that they: a) Failed to ensure that there was furnished to the Society an accountant's report for the year ended 31 December 2006 within six months of that date, in breach of regulation 21(1) of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations 2001, SI no 421 of 2001, in a timely manner, b) Through their conduct, showed disregard for their statutory obligations to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations and showed disregard for the Society's statutory obligation to monitor compliance with the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations for the protection of clients and the public The tribunal ordered that the first-named respondent solicitor and the second-named respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured, b) Jointly and severally pay a sum of €1,000 to the compensation fund, c) Jointly and severally pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

William B Glynn

William B Glynn Solicitors at Aengus House, Long Walk, Galway

24 July 2003

In the matter of William B Glynn, solicitor, carrying on practice under the style and title of William B Glynn Solicitors at Aengus House, Long Walk, Galway, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 1994 [2219/DT365] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) William B Glynn (respondent solicitor) On 24 July 2003, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to comply with an undertaking of 18 September 1995 in a timely manner or at all b) Failed to reply to multiple correspondence from the complainant solicitor in a timely manner or at all c) Failed to reply to the society's correspondence in a timely manner or at all, in particular, the society's letters of 20 February 2001, 11 April 2001, 30 May 2001, 8 February 2002, 22 February 2002, 8 March 2002, 19 March 2002 and 3 May 2002 d) Failed to reply to the society's requirement as set out in the letter of 3 May 2002 to furnish a progress report indicating by return the reasons for the delay in dealing with the matter and how it was proposed to resolve it e) Failed to attend the Registrar's Committee meeting on 11 June 2002 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: a) Do stand censured b) Pay the sum of €1,500 to the compensation fund c) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society as taxed by the taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

William Christopher Ross

Michael Dowling & Co Church Street, Tralee, Co Kerry

18 November 2003

In the matter of William Christopher Ross, solicitor, practising in the firm of Michael Dowling & Co Church Street, Tralee, Co Kerry, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 [7927/DT390] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) William Christopher Ross (respondent solicitor) On 18 November 2003, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found that the respondent solicitor was guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had: a) Failed to apply for a practising certificate for the year 2003 in a timely manner, having only applied for same on 11 March 2003 b) Practised as a solicitor without a practising certificate for the period 1 January 2003 to 11 March 2003 in breach of the provisions of the Solicitors Acts, 1954 to 2002 The tribunal ordered that the respondent solicitor: i) Do stand admonished as to his future conduct and as to his past conduct on this occasion and be advised that as a young solicitor, who qualified in 1997, he must be fully conscious in the future of his own obligation to ensure that his practising certificate application is filed on time ii) Pay a sum of €250 to the compensation fund in relation to the finding set out at (a) above iii) Pay a sum of €250 to the compensation fund in relation to the finding set out at (b) above iv) Pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by the taxing master of the High Court in default of agreement

William J Davis

William J Davis & Company, Solicitors, 14 Herbert Street, Dublin 2

10 April 2008

In the matter of William J Davis, solicitor, of William J Davis & Company, Solicitors, 14 Herbert Street, Dublin 2, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2002 [4399/DT47/07] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) William J Davis (respondent solicitor) On 10 April 2008, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he had, up to the date of the swearing of the Society's grounding affidavit (on 22 June 2007), failed to comply with the undertaking given by him to the complainant's client by letter dated 25 September 2000 and failed to do so despite requests for compliance with the said undertaking The tribunal made an order: a) Admonishing and advising the respondent solicitor, b) Directing the respondent solicitor to pay the sum of €250 to the compensation fund, c) Directing the respondent solicitor to pay 25% of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland as taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement


William JP Egan

Egan Cosgrave and Associates, 101 Lower Baggot Street, Dublin 2 and 138 Sundrive Road, Crumlin, Dublin 12