"Head in sand" solicitor held in contempt over complaint
A solicitor who failed to comply with Court of Session orders to produce files relating to a complaint to the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission has been found guilty of contempt of court, the SLCC has reported.
At a previous hearing the unnamed solicitor had admitted her failure and having put her "head in the sand" over the matter when the SLCC, and subsequently the court, sought production of the files, but it was submitted on her behalf that rather than having deliberately defied or shown disrespect to the court, she had failed to obey the order "because she was in the depths of a difficult situation" and "was so embarrassed that she hid from her responsibilities".
Evidence was led on the personal and business challenges faced by the solicitor and her firm, including the impact of Covid and the loss of key staff which had led to her failure. She admitted that there was no acceptable excuse, and counsel stated that "she was extremely sorry and deeply ashamed of the disrespect shown to the court".
Making their finding of contempt, Lords Malcolm, Pentland and Tyre in the Inner House said that ignoring the request constituted "a deliberate decision not to comply, and that this demonstrated wilful disrespect towards the authority of the court".
In court, Lord Pentland noted that ignoring the court order followed the solicitor having ignored numerous efforts over a lengthy period by the SLCC, as well as the petition served and the original complainer.
Her circumstances "to an extent explained her conduct, but these were mitigating factors - they did not excuse her failure to obey a court order".
He added: "This was extraordinary and serious misconduct by a solicitor who is an officer of the court and therefore subject to a particularly important duty to act on the court’s order". The court was "unable to take any view other than that there had been a deliberate decision not to comply, and that this demonstrated wilful disrespect towards the authority of the court which constituted a contempt of court".
The court also found the firm liable for expenses on an agent and client, client paying basis.
Commenting on the ruling, Neil Stevenson, chief executive of the SLCC, said: "While we sympathise with the solicitor’s personal challenges, businesses must plan for foreseeable changes and incidents around staffing and systems. This is a basic requirement for regulated professionals.
"In court, we adopted a neutral stance as to whether the solicitor should be found to be in contempt. However, we are grateful to the court for its clear statement on the seriousness of this issue and its comments on the impact of the solicitor’s actions on the client who made the complaint and on the SLCC’s ability to discharge its statutory duty to investigate it.
"We hope this decision will encourage all solicitors and firms to respond timeously to complaints and to highlight to them the very real risks of failing to do so. We hope others in the sector will join with us in encouraging and supporting the profession to meet this important professional standard."