The High Court has dismissed an appeal by Luke Heffernan against a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal decision that there was no prima facie case of misconduct by solicitor John Hussey. The court awarded Mr Hussey his costs.
In a judgment delivered on 18 June 2012, President of the High Court Kearns said the tribunal’s decision was appropriate and the appeal had no legal basis. The court did not order a disciplinary inquiry; it dismissed the appeal from the tribunal’s earlier decision.
Mr Heffernan had applied to the tribunal in April 2011 for an inquiry into Mr Hussey’s conduct. His complaints concerned Mr Hussey’s multiple roles in relation to the estate of Mr Heffernan’s late mother, including as solicitor and executor; alleged false affidavits in Circuit Court proceedings; alleged withholding of evidence; a claimed conflict of interest in defending those proceedings; and alleged failures to provide attendance notes and acknowledge who was present when his mother signed her will.
The judgment records Mr Hussey’s account that he acted for Mr Heffernan’s parents in drafting their wills. He said that, in July 2001, Margaret Heffernan confirmed a previously prepared draft and signed her will, which left her Fermoy property at 2 O’Connell Place to Mr Heffernan. After she inherited a second property at 83 McCurtain Street in 2007, Mr Hussey said he visited her in hospital three times in September 2009 to obtain instructions for a new will but could not do so. She died that month. The 2001 will was the only will in existence at her death, according to the judgment.
Separately, Cork Circuit Court ruled in January 2011 that the 2001 will was Mrs Heffernan’s last lawful will and should be admitted to probate. It held that 2 O’Connell Place was bequeathed to Mr Heffernan and that 83 McCurtain Street formed part of the estate’s residue.
On the misconduct appeal, the High Court found that the alleged multiple roles and conflict did not amount to misconduct. It rejected the claim that Mr Hussey’s affidavits of scripts were false, noting that they referred to a draft will and attendance notes as well as the original will. The court also found that the allegation of withheld evidence had not been proved. It said Austin Heffernan’s presence when his mother signed the will did not, by itself, amount to undue influence.