A Dublin solicitor alleged in the High Court yesterday that the Law Society, under the guise of looking at the accounts of his practice, had in fact sought to find out whether some of his clients were making bogus claims.
Mr James Gilhooly SC, for Mr Giles J. Kennedy, solicitor, Eccles Street, Dublin, said it would emerge that the Law Society had had a hidden agenda.
The society had not sought to find out if his client was complying with accounts regulations but instead to find out whether certain clients, with or without his knowledge were making bogus claims.
In judicial review proceedings, Mr Kennedy is seeking to quash a decision of the Law Society to seek an inquiry by its disciplinary tribunal into his conduct. He has also counter-claimed for £737,000 special damages (loss of fees, income and other costs) and is further seeking general damages.
The Law Society denies Mr Kennedy's allegations and claims it was not restricted in the way it carried out its investigations. It claims Mr Kennedy is not entitled to damages. The hearing before Mr Justice Kearns is expected to last four weeks.
Mr Gilhooly said the proceedings arose out of an inspection of Mr Kennedy's books in 1993. Since the mid-1980s the Law Society had carried out routine inspections of solicitors' practices to ascertain whether they had been complying with accounts regulations.
The system operating prior to 1984 was that a member of a firm of accountants would carry out the inspection.
New regulations were introduced in 1984, and the effect of these regulations was the issue in this case. The regulations left the appointment of accountants with the Law Society, and the society seemed to interpret that as meaning it could hire full-time accountants to do the work.
Mr Kennedy claimed it was not open to the society to employ its own in-house accountants. The regulations defined "an accountant in practice".
Mr Gilhooly said the Law Society had hired seven accountants and assigned them to carry out inspections routinely, to see if solicitors were complying with regulations.
In 1993 the society decided to investigate a number of accounts, including that of Mr Kennedy. The society's registrar, Mr Patrick J. Connolly, purported to appoint an accountant, Ms Aisling Foley, to carry out the investigation.
Early in Ms Foley's inspection, Mr Kennedy noticed she appeared to have a hidden agenda, counsel said. She did not interview him or inquire into his book-keeping and accounts systems.
Instead she went around with a list of certain clients which she had ascertained from other accountants in the society who had carried out investigations of other solicitors' practices.
Mr Kennedy had been in practice since 1978 and had about 9,000 client files. Ms Foley sought to look at a small number of cases, many of them former clients.
Mr Gilhooly said his client claimed Ms Foley sought to establish whether clients had been making and setting up bogus personal injuries claims. The Law Society had never alleged that Mr Kennedy was wittingly aware of any such claim.
Counsel said the society had a proper concern about the matter, but Ms Foley, under protest from Mr Kennedy, read confidential reports which were privileged and should not have been looked at without the client's consent.
Ms Foley, although an accountant, was not "an accountant in practice" within the meaning of the regulations. She was not a registered auditor and did not have a practising certificate. She had been admitted as a chartered accountant in December 1992 and employed by the society around that same time.
Mr Gilhooly said the Law Society misinterpreted its powers. They went from county to county, concentrating on sole practitioners and giving much greater latitude to larger solicitors' firms.
Counsel said his client had been lied to and misled. There would be evidence that there were no bogus claims. It was not the function of a professional body to investigate alleged criminal activities. If such activities were suspected, then the society was entitled to go to the Garda.