Counsels

The Complaints Authorization Committee counselled a member that the member’s conduct does not comply with the standard of conduct with respect to Chapter 3, rules 3.7-8 and 3.7-9, of the Code of Professional Conduct. The member was counselled, that when relying on a solicitor’s lien, the solicitor should clearly communicate same, so that the client can make an informed decision on whether to address any fees owing. Further, where it appears that a client may intend to represent themself or retain new counsel, lawyers should confirm that the client has filed the appropriate notice with the Court before deciding not to appear as scheduled.

The Complaints Authorization Committee counselled a member that the member’s conduct does not comply with the standard of conduct with respect to Chapter 3, rule 3.2-1, of the Code of Professional Conduct. The member was counselled, that in the future, where personal circumstances have an impact on a lawyer’s ability to address a file, the lawyer has a duty to inform the client of this impact. This allows a client to make an informed choice about their options, including whether to retain new counsel.

The Complaints Authorization Committee counselled a member that the member’s conduct does not comply with the standard of conduct with respect to Chapter 2, rule 2.1-1, and Chapter 5, rule 5.6-1, of the Code of Professional Conduct. The member was counselled, that in the future, the member should think before posting on Facebook, and to consider whether the posts and comments are true and fair. Additionally, the Committee noted that lawyers, in their private lives, can question the decision of a police authority. However, members should be mindful of communicating in a respectful manner.