Scottish Solicitors' Discipline Tribunal

Finlay Park

A Complaint was made by the Council of the Law Society of Scotland against Finlay Park formerly trading as Finlay Park Solicitors, of Suite 503/6, Baltic Chambers, 50 Wellington Street, Glasgow and now residing at 1/2, 5 Arcan Crescent, Drumchapel, Glasgow (“the Respondent”).  The Tribunal found that the Respondent had failed to comply with the Determination and Direction given by the Council of the Law Society of Scotland under section 42A of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 within the period specified and made an Order under section 53C of the said Act.

Michael Louis Karus

A Complaint was made by the Council of the Law Society of Scotland against MICHAEL LOUIS KARUS, Solicitor, 72 St Stephen Street, Edinburgh (“the Respondent”). The Tribunal found the Respondent guilty of professional misconduct in respect of his failure to respond to correspondence and telephone calls from a firm of solicitors between 9 May 2000 and 29 August 2000, his failure to progress a transaction for the purchase of property expeditiously between 15 May 2000 and 14 August 2000 causing distress and inconvenience to the selling party and his failure to respond to correspondence from the Law Society between 15 January 2001 and 21 March 2001. The Tribunal Censured the Respondent and fined him in the sum of one thousand pounds. The Respondent did not appear to answer the Complaint. The Tribunal found the Respondent guilty in respect of most of the averments contained in the Complaint but found that there was insufficient evidence with regard to two of the averments.

The Tribunal noted that there had been a previous Finding of professional misconduct against the Respondent in 2001, when the Respondent had his practising certificate restricted for a period of five years. The Respondent has disposed of his practice since the last Tribunal hearing and had not held a practising certificate since 2002.

The Tribunal were concerned by the Respondent’s failure to carry out conveyancing transactions with due expedition and his failure to communicate effectively with another firm of solicitors and the Law Society.

James Joseph McDonagh

A Complaint was made by the Council of the Law Society of Scotland against James Joseph McDonagh, Solicitor, 30 Jedburgh Road, Dundee (“the Respondent”). The Tribunal found the Respondent guilty of professional misconduct in respect of his failure to respond to the reasonable requests by the Law Society for information and his holding himself out as entitled to practise as a solicitor by providing legal advice to a client between the early part of August 2001 and the middle of April 2002 without then having in force a Practising Certificate which entitled him to do so. The Tribunal Censured the Respondent and Directed in terms of section 53(5) of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 that for a period of ten years any Practising Certificate held or issued to the Respondent shall be subject to such restriction as will limit him to acting as a qualified assistant to such employer as may be approved by the Council of the Law Society, such restriction to run concurrent with the Respondent’s existing restriction.

The Respondent was acting for his client when he was working at McKenzie & Co under a restricted Practising Certificate. The Respondent then left McKenzie & Co and ceased to have a Practising Certificate but continued to act for his client in relation to the same subject matter. The Respondent did not tell his client that his status had changed and the Tribunal considered that in the circumstances he had a very strong duty to do so. The Tribunal accordingly found that although the Respondent did not actively state to his client that he was a solicitor, his failure to advise that he was no longer a solicitor resulted in his client reasonably assuming that he still was. The Tribunal further found that the Respondent’s failure to reply to correspondence from the Law Society seriously hampered the Law Society in the performance of its statutory duty and brought the profession into disrepute.

The Tribunal noted that there was a previous Finding of misconduct against the Respondent which had resulted in a period of restriction for five years due to expire in 2005. The Tribunal considered that a further period of restriction would be the most appropriate sentence to run concurrently with the Respondent’s existing restriction.

Alan Alexander Craig

A Complaint was made by the Council of the Law Society of Scotland against Alan Alexander Craig, Solicitor, 194 Glen More, St Leonards, East Kilbride (“the Respondent”). The Tribunal found the Respondent guilty of professional misconduct in respect of his failure to progress court actions which he had been instructed so to do by clients, his failure to progress instructions given to him by a client, his misleading his clients, his unreasonably withdrawing from acting for a client, his failure to implement a mandate and his failure to respond to the reasonable requests from the Law Society for information. The Tribunal suspended the Respondent from practice for a period of two years to run concurrently with the suspension imposed by the Tribunal on 12 December 2001. The Tribunal also directed in terms of section 53(6) of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 that the suspension take effect on the date on which the written findings were intimated to the respondent.

The Tribunal noted that conduct complained of was very similar to the kind of conduct dealt with by the Tribunal in 2001 and had been in the pipeline at that time. The Tribunal were concerned by the Respondent’s misleading of clients and his persistent conduct over the last few years. The Tribunal considered that an additional period of suspension was an appropriate penalty.