The president of the High Court has rejected a challenge by suspended solicitor Declan O’Callaghan, which could have further delayed a bid to have him struck off the roll of solicitors for professional misconduct over his handling of a land deal in Co Mayo.
Mr O’Callaghan had brought a judicial review challenge over the procedures adopted by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in reaching its findings last year of professional misconduct over the 2007 land deal.
Barrister Ruadhán Ó Chiaráin, for Nirvanna, the company that brought the complaint against Mr O’Callaghan to the tribunal, had argued the “convoluted judicial review” by Mr O’Callaghan was not permissible and was an attempt to delay the hearing of his High Court appeal over the tribunal’s findings.
If Mr O’Callaghan loses his appeal, the High Court will then consider whether or not to grant an application by the Law Society to strike him off.
GAA live updates: Donegal face Tyrone after wins for Armagh, Monaghan and Meath
Vogue Williams: ‘Spencer ran towards me with red flags hanging off him in every direction’
David McWilliams: There are signs of overheating everywhere you look in Ireland’s economy
Bono defends taking honour from Joe Biden and questions ‘competitive empathy’ over Gaza
His challenge to the tribunal’s procedures, which included claims it breached his right to fair procedures, was heard by the High Court president, Mr Justice David Barniville, on Thursday.
Having heard submissions from Michael Mullooly, for Mr O’Callaghan, and from Mr Ó Chiaráin, the judge said he was rejecting the challenge and would give his reasons for that in a written judgment next week.
His decision clears the way for the hearing, on a date to be fixed, of the appeal and, if that is unsuccessful, the strike-off application.
The Law Society has agreed with the tribunal recommendation that Mr O’Callaghan be struck off, but the final decision on whether or not to grant a strike-off order must be made by the High Court president.
The three-member tribunal had last summer found Mr O’Callaghan guilty of four counts of professional misconduct over his handling of the 2007 land deal involving a company of Co Mayo businessman Tom Fleming.
Now aged 80, Mr Fleming claimed Nirvanna never received €250,000 for selling the land to a now-deceased businessman. Mr O’Callaghan denied the sum was owed, and disputed the transaction was for “sale” of the lands.
The tribunal upheld the Nirvanna complaint, finding professional misconduct on grounds Mr O’Callaghan breached his duty of care to the company, provided inadequate professional services, and purported to act for vendor and purchaser in a transaction where there was “a clear conflict of interest”.
In recommending strike-off, the tribunal also had regard to two findings of professional misconduct previously made by it against Mr O’Callaghan, suspended as a solicitor since 2018 arising from a separate Law Society investigation into matters at his now defunct practice Kilrane O’Callaghan & Co, which was based in Ballaghderreen, Co Roscommon.
The suspension was imposed pending a tribunal hearing of the society’s application for an inquiry into matters arising from its investigation. Concerns raised in an independent solicitor’s report for that investigation included that Mr O’Callaghan withdrew substantial fees from the estate of a bereaved child.
Findings of professional misconduct were previously made against Mr O’Callaghan in 1990 and 2019. The 1990 finding was on grounds including Mr O’Callaghan had, improperly and knowingly, applied clients monies for personal benefit, purchase of a private dwelling residence and a car, and the making of repayments to a building society. That led to a High Court direction in 1991 he should practice for some three years under the supervision of a more senior solicitor.
In November 2019, the tribunal found him guilty of professional misconduct over findings including he failed to remit costs and outlays to a law firm arising out of litigation between their client and a deceased person, resulting in Circuit Court proceedings being issued against the complainant firm’s client.
Mr O’Callaghan was censured and ordered to pay €10,000 to the Law Society’s compensation fund, plus €7,500 towards the society’s costs.
