The Court of Appeal has dismissed John Tobin’s appeal against the decision to strike him from the roll of solicitors, holding that the High Court was entitled to treat his repeated failures to honour undertakings as serious enough to warrant the ultimate sanction.
The appeal concerned nine complaints to the Law Society, involving undertakings given between 2000 and 2007 to three financial institutions. The undertakings enabled borrowers to draw down substantial loans and required, among other things, registration of property titles and the creation of first charges for the banks. In some transactions Mr Tobin was the borrower; in another he acted for his brother, and in the rest he acted for clients.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found misconduct in each complaint, which Mr Tobin admitted. It recommended that he be found unfit to practise and struck from the roll. The High Court made that order on 13 February 2015, following repeated adjournments that gave Mr Tobin time to address the outstanding undertakings. The Court of Appeal noted that, by September 2013, seven undertakings remained outstanding and related to loan facilities with a redemption value of about €6.5 million, including more than €3 million borrowed by Mr Tobin himself.
Mr Tobin argued that the High Court had placed too much weight on a separate judgment concerning one transaction, and insufficient weight on his efforts to resolve the undertakings, his age, cooperation, admission of responsibility, and the absence of client losses. The Law Society maintained that the strike-off was within the High Court’s discretion and that the appeal court should not substitute its own view unless the decision was clearly wrong.
The Court of Appeal held that the High Court had properly considered the mitigating factors and the limited progress made despite the opportunities provided. It said a solicitor must have control over an undertaking when giving it; confidence in solicitors’ undertakings is central to the profession’s integrity. Repeated failures to honour them may be exceptionally serious even where clients have not suffered financial loss.
The court concluded that the strike-off was proportionate and open to the High Court on the evidence. It dismissed the appeal. The judgment also noted that Mr Tobin may apply in future to have his name restored to the roll, and that progress made before such an application could be considered then.