The High Court has refused solicitor John F. Condon’s appeal against a condition requiring him to practise under the supervision of a solicitor with at least 10 years’ standing, approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland.
In a judgment delivered on 21 September 2015, President of the High Court Kearns said the procedure followed by the Society’s Complaints and Client Relations Committee (CCRC) was appropriate. The court refused the relief Condon sought: an order directing that his 2015 practising certificate issue unconditionally.
The condition followed a CCRC decision communicated on 8 April 2015. It provided that, from 1 September that year, Condon could practise only as an employee under the required supervision. The court’s decision left that condition in place.
The CCRC had first considered the application at a meeting on 23 January 2015, which Condon did not attend. He later said he received the reminder inviting him to that meeting only after it had taken place. The matter was then relisted. Condon attended a second meeting on 31 March, where complaints and steps taken to address them were discussed.
Condon argued that the Society had failed to conduct an adequate inquiry and that supervision was disproportionate and impractical for his practice. He said some complaints should not have been counted and that conditions attached to his 2014 certificate were sufficient. The Society disputed the procedural challenge, saying it had provided opportunities for written and oral submissions and had considered his responses.
The court said Condon had been given ample opportunity to address the complaints at the March meeting and on two occasions overall. It explained that the certificate process was not the forum for deciding whether individual complaints were true; those matters were for a separate disciplinary process.
In upholding the condition, Kearns referred to what he described as a consistent and worrying trend in the complaints and difficulties the Society experienced in obtaining adequate responses from Condon, including after the earlier certificate conditions. The court considered supervision appropriate until Condon could satisfy the Society that procedures were in place to prevent further complaints.