O'Callaghan v The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (Approved)

Whelan J.������������������������������������������ �� Neutral Citation Number [2023] IECA 3

             In order to deal with the legal issues it is necessary to look briefly at the factual context in which they arise.� I will then look at the relevant statutory provisions and the rules governing the receipt of complaints and the conduct of hearings by the respondent, the arguments made by the parties and how the issues were treated by the High Court judge in the course of dealing with the two main legal issues raised on this appeal.�

             The only point of potential relevance is the averment in para. 2 of the appellant�s first affidavit which, according to the respondent, confirms the appellant�s knowledge of the basis on which the Flemings were acting on behalf of the notice party.� The relevant averment is as follows: -

� Mr. Fleming is now the company secretary of Nirvanna and the directors are Sean Fleming and Una Fleming his son and daughter respectively.� Thomas Fleming and Sean Fleming and Una Fleming are equal shareholders in the company. �

             On 8 th February, 2011 a division of the respondent considered all of the relevant documentation and determined that there was a prima facie case of misconduct against the appellant for an inquiry as regards four separate allegations.� These allegations were set out in a letter of the same date from the respondent to the Law Society, to the appellant and to each of the Flemings at Nirvanna Holdings Limited.� This was followed up by a formal notice of inquiry (form DT5) dated 11 th March, 2011.