Examining corruption in Ireland
You are currently browsing the archive for the Solicitors category.
The Law Society is ‘outraged’ by an apparent slur on the profession by the master of the High Court Edmund Honohan.
Mr. Honohan said that solicitors were the group:
Most frequently found to have only a nodding acquaintance with the truth.
The truth always hurts.
I see the Kosovo Chamber of Advocates (KCA) has been taking advice from the Irish Law Society and Bar Council on how to create a new code of ethics and disciplinary system.
Surely this war torn state has suffered enough?
The fraudster Jim Flavin of DCC is walking around a free man because Fyffes, in their own interests, decided to take a civil rather than a criminal case against him. Despite the Supreme Court’s conclusion that Flavin was guilty of insider trading to the tune of €83 million the Irish State has made no move to press criminal charges.
The rogue solicitor Michael Lynn is also enjoying the benefits of being dealt with under civil rather than criminal law. Lynn, whose alleged fraud also involves a figure of around €80 million, is due to give evidence from London via video link next month in a case unrelated to his own dodgy activities.
For reasons best known to himself the DPP has decided not to initiate criminal charges against Lynn. This situation makes life very easy for the rogue solicitor; he can come and go as he please so long as he doesn’t return to Ireland.
The Garda Fraud Bureau investigation into Lynn is slow and cumbersome and according to Garda sources will not be completed for a number of months.
When the investigation is complete the DPP must then make a decision on whether criminal charges should be brought. According to a report in today’s Irish Independent this will also take several months. We are not told why a decision like this should take so long.
Here’s what I think.
Civil rather than criminal proceedings allow Lynn the freedom to continue operating his businesses. This means he can work away at trying to resolve his ‘difficulties’.
Meanwhile, the low key and long drawn out process here in Ireland, whether intentional or co-incidental, leaves the way open for a deal to be eventually worked out to the satisfaction of all parties.
We shouldn’t therefore be surprised if at some point there’s an announcement that ‘arrangements’ have been made between the interested parties and the DPP doesn’t have to resort to all that embarrassing and nasty criminal proceedings stuff after all.
The powers that be can then continue to operate under the illusion that Ireland is on a par with other Western jurisdictions where the rule of law is seen as vital to a healthy democracy.
Ahhhh, Isn’t it lovely to see that Michael Lynn and the wife are still seeing each other. Still in contact, still able to meet in secret despite all those pesky police allegedly searching high and low for the bold Michael (Nine News, 9th report).
I was in tears as I heard Brid Murphy’s explanation that she’s just a simple housewife.
“My role is to make a home; when Michael asks me to sign a document I do so without reading it because I trust Michael.”
Brid should be careful here, she could have the entire Yes side in the referendum campaign banging on her door pleading with her to explain to the Irish people how easy it is to sign a document purely on the basis of trust.
Anyway, Brid tells us that the whole thing is very difficult and she’s still trying to figure it all out. Well, she’s in good company there. Legal and law enforcement agencies here are also having a difficult time trying to figure it all out.
Their job could be made a great deal easier if Brid could only tell them where her scarlet pimpernel husband is presently hiding out. He headed off to Portugal she said but didn’t give specific details.
I wonder has it occurred to enforcement agencies to ask her for a contact number so that when the next tryst is being arranged they could tag along.
While browsing the website of the Law Society of Ireland this morning in search of some information I came across this little gem.
RULE OF LAW IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD
The objective of the Rule of Law Project is for the Law Society, through its members, to develop and enhance the Rule of Law in the developing world with the assistance of Irish Aid or otherwise, so that human rights, democracy, good governance and justice may be available to all people. This project is being run in cooperation with the Bar Council.
The Irish Law Society; is a quasi-secret society that both represents and allegedly regulates its members. An organisation whose members, mmm…let’s be charitable and say, are often involved in dodgy activities but yet, miraculously, never seem to find themselves made accountable under the same law as the rest of us mere mortals.
This crowd is now off to the developing world to enhance the rule of law. It’s the ultimate oxymoran.
I see in the today’s Irish Times that I have shocked a solicitor. That’s one to note in the calendar.
The core issue for solicitors is simple.
They can opt to remain within their unassailable legal fortress where they can do pretty much as they like with the single drawback of being rightfully seen as a largely disreputable profession.
Or
They can come out into the open and submit themselves to regulation by the law just like everybody else.
They will benefit greatly if the decide on the latter. The unacceptable number of dodgy solicitors will be quickly rooted out and the profession will begin to regain public trust and respect.
Here’s my ‘shocking’ letter and the solicitor’s reply.
Madam,
Several solicitors have expressed concerns (November 2nd, 3rd, 6th) arising from the activities of two of their colleagues, Michael Lynn and Thomas Byrne.
Some blame the situation on the intense pressure solicitors are under, the exploitation of solicitors by the banks and the greed of some clients who are prepared to risk paying peanuts for monkeys.
Also, in mitigation of their profession, they trot out the old canard that only a few rotten apples are involved – thus suggesting that, by and large, the legal profession has its house in order.
The reality is different. In recent years it has become obvious that solicitors, operating under the privileged protection of self-regulation, are among the least accountable groups in society. It is ridiculous and unacceptable that the Law Society should regulate and at the same time represent its members.
This scandal is just the latest in a series that have brought the profession into disrepute. The disgraceful rip-off by solicitors of abuse victims appearing before the Residential Institution Redress Board has yet to be resolved more than two years after the victims were assured by the Law Society that their cases would be dealt with immediately and transparently through a fast-track system.
In his letter of November 2nd, Muredach Doherty is highly critical of the banks, claiming they are at least morally deserving of the difficulties they find themselves in as a result of the activities of Byrne and Lynn.
He and his colleagues would be well advised to examine the quality of morality in their own profession in order to preserve a rapidly dwindling level of public trust. – Yours, etc,
ANTHONY SHERIDAN,
Madam, – I am shocked by Anthony Sheridan’s conclusion that, because of the recent controversies, we solicitors are now morally suspect (November 7th).
It presupposes that as a profession we are some sort of moral supermen and superwomen who are not subject to human failing.
I, at least, claim no moral superiority or insight and am a human being subject to the same failings as everyone else.
He and other commentators are correct, however, in concluding that The Law Society cannot be both a representative body and a regulatory body.It has now become oppressive to practising solicitors in its attempt to assure the public of its regulatory role. It no longer functions as an effective representative body for solicitors.
It is only right that when solicitors fail legally and morally, an effective regulatory body should hold them to account. It is also right that when solicitors fail they have a representative body to speak for them. The present system is satisfactory for neither solicitors nor clients.
I do not care who regulates me. If they do not do their job the public will let them know. I do care who represents me.
Yours, etc,
RODERICK TYRRELL, Solicitor, Haddington Road, Dublin 4.
Letter in today’s Irish Times
SHARP PRACTICE BY SOLICITORS
Madam,
Several solicitors have expressed concerns (November 2nd, 3rd, 6th) arising from the activities of two of their colleagues, Michael Lynn and Thomas Byrne.
Some blame the situation on the intense pressure solicitors are under, the exploitation of solicitors by the banks and the greed of some clients who are prepared to risk paying peanuts for monkeys.
Also, in mitigation of their profession, they trot out the old canard that only a few rotten apples are involved – thus suggesting that, by and large, the legal profession has its house in order.
The reality is different. In recent years it has become obvious that solicitors, operating under the privileged protection of self-regulation, are among the least accountable groups in society. It is ridiculous and unacceptable that the Law Society should regulate and at the same time represent its members.
This scandal is just the latest in a series that have brought the profession into disrepute. The disgraceful rip-off by solicitors of abuse victims appearing before the Residential Institution Redress Board has yet to be resolved more than two years after the victims were assured by the Law Society that their cases would be dealt with immediately and transparently through a fast-track system.
In his letter of November 2nd, Muredach Doherty is highly critical of the banks, claiming they are at least morally deserving of the difficulties they find themselves in as a result of the activities of Byrne and Lynn.
He and his colleagues would be well advised to examine the quality of morality in their own profession in order to preserve a rapidly dwindling level of public trust. – Yours, etc,
ANTHONY SHERIDAN, Cobh, Co Cork.
November 2nd: Seven men arrested for alleged attempted robbery.
Three days later:
November 5th: Men hauled before court under armed guard to receive justice.
Sum involved: €1.2 million.
October 15th: Story breaks of solicitor allegedly involved in massive property fraud.
Twenty days later:
November 3rd: Judge is considering whether such matters might warrant investigation by those charged with criminal law.
Sum involved: At least €70 million.
Yet another solicitor is under scrutiny for allegedly robbing his clients. Michael Lynn, solicitor and property developer is under investigation by the Law Society for what they sheepishly describe as ‘acts of dishonesty’ possibly involving millions of euros.
On Liveline last Thursday (18th Oct.) a caller related how his mother and father were robbed by another solicitor, a case that demonstrates just how well protected this privileged group is from real justice.
In 1981, the couple bought a property in Nassau Street Dublin. Unfortunately, they employed a corrupt solicitor by the name of Johnathan Brooks.
He never disclosed to them that he was the owner of the property and on the day they bought the property Brooks changed the leases on the two shops on the ground floor so that they reverted to him after a number of years. This crooked solicitor also robbed the registration and stamp duty on the property.
When the corruption was discovered in 1985 a complaint was made to the Law Society but they didn’t want to know. This is not unusual behaviour for this august body.
After over a year of stalling the matter eventually came before the disciplinary committee of the High Court. This court has the power to strike off a solicitor.
The caller related how badly he was treated by the three sitting judges and claimed that they were sitting in judgement of him rather than the corrupt solicitor. Eventually, Brooks admitted that he had ‘forgotten to do the paperwork’. (A case of tribunalitis?).
He assured the judges that he had paid all the fines, settled with Revenue and stamped all the deeds. The learned gentlemen never asked for proof of these claims and some years later the caller discovered that Brooks had lied to the court.
In all, Brooks robbed about €15 million from clients in his short criminal career, he committed suicide in 1992.
Joe Duffy naively asked about reimbursement for the victims of this rogue solicitor from the Law Society. In fact, the Law Society did everything they could to keep this very valuable property for themselves. It was only when they were threatened with the High Court and given a sum of money that they relented.
It took this family 24 years to get what was rightfully theirs back from this criminal solicitor and the greed of the Law Society. The caller said that of about 100 solicitors he had dealt with in his life, only about five were honest – he’s lucky.
He also said that solicitors should be put in stocks and pelted with rotten vegetables – I agree.
There was an excellent example today (19th item) of how effective and efficient the legal system can be in our little banana republic.
It seems that a group of people, fed up with being allegedly ripped off and abused by certain members of the legal profession gave vent to their anger on a website – rateyoursolicitor.com. A barrister took exception to remarks made about her and is suing a Mr. Gill, the alleged administrator of the site, for defamation.
A supporter of Mr. Gill apparently ‘snorted’ today in court while the judge was speaking and refused to apologise. The judge fined him €10,000 on the spot for contempt of court.
So, what have we here? A serious dispute between two angry citizens – a barrister and Mr. Gill. The case is dealt with in open court where everybody can see justice being done. The public can attend; the media can attend and report.
Both sides are equally represented and allowed make their case which will be decided in due course. One citizen was found to be in contempt of court and received instant justice in the form of a heavy fine.
All these activities and procedures are normal in any legitimate democracy.
Just over a year ago it was discovered that at least twenty solicitors had robbed tens of thousands of Euros from their clients.
These particular clients had been abused, both physically and sexually, for years by both the State and Church in various institutions. The money robbed was part of a meagre compensation for their years of torture and abuse. Many of them are illiterate and were therefore easy prey for these legal vultures.
None of these thieving solicitors will be brought to a court of law like Mr. Gill and his supporters. Their cases are being judged by fellow solicitors, behind closed doors, in secret by the Irish Law Society.
Only one case has been completed to date and the solicitor in question was completely exonerated by his peers. Despite this outrageous outcome, the money robbed, €11,670, was repaid to the victim who lives in England and survives on benefits of stg£116 per week.
The judge dealing with Mr. Gill and his supporters delivered a stern warning to them on the seriousness of their alleged actions.
“In a civilized society, there were some things you were not permitted to do. Mr. Gill and his members had crossed that line.”
Apparently, there is no line for some members of the legal profession.
Recent Comments