The High Court has dismissed Eugene O’Brien’s appeal against a Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal decision that there was no prima facie case of misconduct by solicitor C.F. O’Connell. The court affirmed the tribunal’s finding and said there were no bona fide grounds for an inquiry into O’Brien’s complaints.
The appeal concerned a tribunal decision dated 15 April 2010. O’Brien’s complaints arose from legal advice O’Connell provided after being engaged in May 1998. O’Brien sought advice about his share in a family holding following his brother’s death intestate, and about his mother’s estate.
O’Brien initially alleged that he had not received IR£10,000 (€12,697.38) from his brother, Frank O’Brien, in connection with a 1998 property transaction. O’Connell maintained that the payment was made by cheque dated 1 December 1999 and lodged to O’Brien’s bank account the following day. The judgment refers to a bank letter and a copy of the cheque. O’Brien later withdrew that complaint, as well as a separate allegation about the circumstances in which O’Connell introduced himself.
O’Brien then alleged that O’Connell acted for both the vendor and purchaser, and that the property was sold for less than its true market value. O’Connell denied acting for both sides. In an affidavit, he said the purchaser, Frank O’Brien, was represented by Joseph Morrissey & Co. Solicitors, and that O’Connell had not negotiated the price. He said the price discussions took place between O’Brien, his uncle, his brothers and their accountant, and that he was instructed afterwards to implement the agreement. He also said he advised O’Brien to obtain a valuation of the farm.
In dismissing the appeal, the court said there was no evidence that O’Connell had negotiated the price, and noted that another firm represented the purchaser. It concluded that O’Connell’s role was to implement the agreement and that O’Brien received the payment provided for under it.
The court’s decision was confined to the appeal from the tribunal’s finding on whether there was a prima facie case of misconduct. It dismissed the appeal and affirmed that finding.