Solicitor Disciplinary Tribunal Decisions

Introduction

Welcome to the Irish Claims Board’s solicitor disciplinary records page. We believe that understanding solicitor conduct is crucial for anyone navigating the claims process. Remember, the Irish Claims Board offers a free assessment on claims—we should be your first port of call before engaging a solicitor. Our expert team is here to provide clear, unbiased advice, empowering you to make informed decisions without cost or commitment. This page highlights disciplinary records to help you stay aware of solicitor conduct and choose trustworthy professionals when needed.

Back to listDetails for Seosamh O'Daimhin
Name
Seosamh O'Daimhin
Address
Devine Solicitors, 9 O'Rahilly St, Nenagh, Co Tipperary
Date of Order
29/11/2010
Decision
 
In the matter of Seosamh O’Daimhin (otherwise Joseph Devine), solicitor, practising as Devine Solicitors at 9 O’Rahilly Street, Nenagh, Co Tipperary, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [6260/DT17/09 and High Court record no 2010/97 SA]
 Law Society of Ireland (applicant)
 Seosamh O’Daimhin (otherwise Joseph Devine) (respondent solicitor) 
  
 On 22 October 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he:
  Failed to pursue a tax rebate application to the Revenue Commissioners in respect of capital gains tax paid on the sale of the property of the complainant’s father, located at Garrykennedy in early 2005,
 Failed to respond adequately to the complainant’s correspondence, telephone calls and emails over a three-year period from 2005 to 2007,
 Failed to comply with the directions of the Complaints and Client Relations Committee of 16 April 2008, whereby he was directed to do the following:
 
 1)   Provide a copy of his letter and cheque paying the capital gains tax,
 2)   Provide a letter from the Revenue confirming the amount of CGT paid and the date upon which it is was paid,
 3)   Provide a statement from his accountant giving a statement of account and, in particular, confirming that the €2,000 referred to in the complainant’s letter of complaint had been paid,
 4)   Provide a copy of his letter to the complainant furnishing a refund of the fees,
  Failed to reply adequately to the Society’s correspondence and, in particular, letters dated 12 April 2007, 18 July 2007, 1 August 2007, 9 August 2007, 24 August 2007, 3 September 2007, 11 September 2007, 18 October 2007, 26 October 2007, 18 January 2008, 1 February 2008, 11 February 2008, 26 February 2008, 6 March 2008, 26 March 2008, 9 April 2008, 22 April 2008, 13 May 2008, 28 May 2008 and 5 June 2008 respectively.
 
  
 The tribunal made the following recommendations in respect of the respondent solicitor:
 a)      That the respondent solicitor not be permitted to practise as a sole practitioner or in partnership, that he be permitted only to practise as an assistant solicitor under the direct control and supervision of another solicitor of at least ten years’ standing, to be approved in advance by the Law Society of Ireland,
 b)      That the respondent solicitor make restitution to a named former client in the sum of €2,000 plus VAT at 21%, which figure includes the fee of another named solicitor,
 c)       That the respondent solicitor pay the reasonable expenses of the named former client and the other named solicitor in relation to their attendance at the hearing on the 22 October 2009, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement.
  
 On 29 November 2010, the President of the High Court ordered that:
 1)      The name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors,
 2)      The respondent solicitor pay restitution to the named former client in the sum of €2,000 plus VAT at 21%, which figure includes the fee of the other named solicitor,
 3)      That the respondent solicitor pay the reasonable expenses of the named former client and the other named solicitor in relation to their attendance at the hearing on the 22 October 2009, to be taxed by a taxing master of the High Court, in default of agreement;
 4)      The respondent solicitor pay the costs of the proceedings to be taxed in default of agreement,
 5)      The respondent solicitor pay the costs of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal proceedings, to include witness expenses to be taxed in default of agreement.
  
 Subsequent to the making of that order by the president, the respondent solicitor has appealed against that order to the Supreme Court and the appeal bears record number 004/2011.