Judgment: 2023-05-25 · Court archive

Court of Appeal lets solicitor leave record in Scotchstone case after relationship breakdown

The court allowed Doran W. O’Toole & Co. to cease acting for Scotchstone Capital Fund Ltd., finding that the solicitor-client relationship had broken down irretrievably. Costs of the application remain to be decided.

Court of Appeal · [2023] IECA 129

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Scotchstone Capital Fund Ltd.
  • Piotr Skoczylas (Plaintiff)
  • Ireland
  • Doran W. O’Toole
What

The court allowed Doran W. O’Toole & Co. to cease acting for Scotchstone Capital Fund Ltd., finding that the solicitor-client relationship had broken down irretrievably. Costs of the application remain to be decided.

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The Court of Appeal has allowed Doran W. O’Toole & Co. to come off record for Scotchstone Capital Fund Ltd., finding that the solicitor-client relationship had broken down and could not continue, even in a limited role.

The Court of Appeal has allowed Doran W. O’Toole & Co. to come off record for Scotchstone Capital Fund Ltd., finding that the solicitor-client relationship had broken down and could not continue, even in a limited role.

In a judgment dated 25 May 2023, the court said it was not required to resolve the parties’ competing accounts of how their relationship deteriorated. It found that their affidavits and correspondence showed substantial discord, and that both sides accepted there was no longer a relationship of trust.

The application arose in the company’s appeal, alongside its director Piotr Skoczylas, in proceedings seeking damages from Ireland for alleged breaches of EU law. The Court of Appeal had dismissed that appeal in January 2022. It later refused Mr Skoczylas’s application to reopen the decision or stay the proceedings. A hearing on costs in the appeal and that later application remained outstanding.

Solicitor Doran W. O’Toole said he could no longer act for the company. Mr Skoczylas opposed the application, arguing that the solicitor had been retained only to provide “technical/limited” representation while Mr Skoczylas prepared and presented the company’s submissions. He also said the company could not afford a replacement solicitor and had been unsuccessful in seeking legal aid.

The court accepted that the company had not found replacement representation and weighed that difficulty, along with the company’s claimed lack of funds. But it held those concerns did not outweigh the breakdown in the relationship. A solicitor could not be required to remain on record simply to adopt submissions or directions with which he might disagree, the court said, given his independent duties to the court.

The court also rejected the claim that Mr Skoczylas had not been ready to part company with Mr O’Toole in October 2022. It concluded that emails from 11 October showed Mr Skoczylas was prepared to end the arrangement then. The court said the company had already filed written submissions on costs in the underlying appeal, which would give the court an indication of its position even if it had no solicitor at the eventual costs hearing.

The court granted Mr O’Toole’s application to come off record for the company. It did not decide the costs of the application; it invited Mr O’Toole and Mr Skoczylas to file written submissions of no more than 1,000 words within 21 days of receiving the judgment.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review