Comments:
1. But note the complaint concerned my exercise of rights of audience by an opponent. I had the required rights so the complaint could have been disposed of without reference to me.
IPS comments/learning points:
Under the Investigation, Disciplinary and Appeals rules, where a complaint is made we are required to notify the member about the complaint.
Although the member considered that we could have disposed of the matter without reference to them we had to carry out an investigation before we were able to reach the point of disposing of the case. The investigation involved establishing the advocacy rights the member exercised.
15. Did our report provide a satisfactory summary of your response to the complaint?
2014
YES NO
No response 2013
0 0
2012
1 (8%) 1 (8%)
2011
8 (100%) 6 (100%) 10 (84%) 6 (100%) 0 0
0 0
SECTION 3: OUTCOME
16. Did we let you know about the decision in your case promptly (we normally have 5 working days to inform you of the decision)?
2014
YES NO
8 (100%) 0
2013
6 (100%) 0
2012
11 (92%) 1 (8%)
2011
6 (100%) 0
17. Did we make you aware that our investigation had come to an end?
2014
YES NO
8 (100%) 0
2013
6 (100%) 0
2012
12 (100%) 0
2011
6 (100%) 0
18. Were you made aware if you could appeal and the time limits for making an appeal?
2014
YES NO
N/A
6 (75%) 0
2 (25%) 2013
6 (100%) 0 0
2012
10 (84%) 0
2 (16%) 2011
5 (100%) 0 0
19. Was an appeal form sent to you, if you had indicated that you wished to appeal?
2014
YES NO
N/A
4 (50%) 0
4 (50%) 2013
3 (50%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%)
2012
2 (16%) 0
10 (84%) 2011
3 (75%) 1 (25%) -
Timely Comments:
1. One member made the same comment as at question 14 which was ‘But note the complainant concerned my exercise of rights of audience by an opponent. I had the required rights so the complaint could have been disposed of without reference to me.’
2. ‘Complainant not a client action by them intended to avoid O/S inv’ IPS comments/learning points:
We have considered whether the matter could have been disposed of without notifying the member. An important part of the investigation procedure is to allow both parties the opportunity to respond to allegations made against them. We take the view that a member should be informed of allegations made against them as be given the opportunity to respond to the allegations.
21. Overall, how satisfied were you with how we handled your complaint?
Very dissatisfied Fairly dissatisfied Acceptable
Fairly satisfied Very satisfied
2014 0
2013 0
2012 1 (8%)
1(12.5%) 1 (17%) 2 (17%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%)
1 (17%) 2 (17%) 1 (17%) 4 (33%)
3(37.5%) 3 (50%) 3 (25%)
2011 0 0
1 (17%) 1 (17%) 4 (66%)
Fair
Proportionate YES NO
Consistent
N/A YES
NO Transparent
N/A YES NO
N/A YES NO
Impartial
No response N/A YES NO
N/A YES NO
N/A
IPS comments/learning points:
Where a member has indicated not applicable this is because the complaint had not been upheld. Therefore there was no need for appeal. 20. Do you consider that the process was:
2014 2013 1 (17%) 0 1 (17%) 0 0 0 2 (16%)
0 0
1 (17%) 2012 2011
5 (62.5%) 4 (67%) 5 (42%) 6 (100%) 3 (37.5%) 1 (17%) 7 (58%) 0
0 8 (100%) 5 (83%)
0 0
12
(100%) 0
6 (100%) 0
8 (100%) 5 (83%) 2 (100%) 6 (100%) 0 0
7 (87.5%) 5 (83%) 8 (68%) 6 (100%) 1 (12.5%) 1 (17%) 2 (16%) 0
0 1 (17%)
8 (100%) 5 (83%) 10 (84%) 6 (100%) 0 0
2 (16%) 1 (17%)
7 (87.5%) 5 (83%) 10 (84%) 6 (100%) 1 (12.5%) 0
2 (16%) 1 (17%) 0 0
Professional standards for specialist lawyers 33
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42