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.
Joseph Fahey Ballygar Road, Mountbellew, Co Galway 07/04/2008 In the matter of Joseph Fahey, solicitor, of Ballygar Road, Mountbellew, Co Galway, and in the matter of the Details for Joseph Fahey
Name
Address
Date of Order
Decision
Law Society of Ireland (applicant)
Joseph Fahey (respondent solicitor)
On 6 November 2007, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that:
a) At the early stages of the investigation, it was not possible to determine the true clients’ fund position because the books of account were in arrears. The accountant’s report for 28 February 2003 showed a deficit of €270,083 as of the reporting date. This deficit was mainly caused by debit balances. The accountant’s report for the year ended 29 February 2004 showed a deficit in client funds of €116,103 at the date, again mainly caused by debit balances. The accountant’s report for the year ended 28 February 2005 showed a deficit in client account of €64,216 as of the reporting date.
b) Subject to the matters set out in paragraph 2.2 of the investigating accountant’s report, there was an apparent deficit of €32,687 in the client account as of 31 August 2005.
c) Debit balances amounted to €32,687 as of the date of 31 August 2005.
d) In June 2004, the books of account were almost two years in arrears. Since October 2004, the books were written up by a very competent bookkeeper and at the time of the investigation they were approximately five weeks in arrears.
e) In a purchase by a named client from a named vendor, the stamp duty amounted to €5,142. Interest and penalties were avoided because the transfer deed was ‘updated’ to 12 May 2004, although the purchase closed in January 2002.
f) In another purchase by the aforementioned named client, it would appear that stamp duty at 9% plus interest and penalty may have been avoided because the deed was ‘updated’ from on or about 30 October 2001 to 20 November 2002.
g) In the course of acting for a named client in relation to a purchase of property, interest and penalty on stamp duty of €7,140 were avoided because the transfer deed was ‘updated’ from in or about September 2003 to 20 August 2004.
h) In the course of acting for a named client in relation to the purchase of a property, interest and penalty on stamp duty of €9,560 were avoided because the transfer deed was ‘updated’ from 2 February 2004 to 4 April 2005.
i) In the course of acting for two named clients in relation to the purchase of one site each, interest and penalty on the stamp duty amounts of €1,125 were avoided because the transfer deeds were ‘updated’ from in or about August 2004 to 20 April 2005 and 25 August 2005 respectively.
j) The solicitor acted for a named builder in relation to the sale of new houses, and in six cases he also acted for the purchasers of the houses, in breach of the Solicitors (Professional Practice Conduct and Discipline) Regulations of 1997 (SI no 85 of 1997).
The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 7 April 2008, the President of the High Court ordered, pursuant to section 8 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1960, as substituted by section 18 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 and amended by section 9 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 2002:
i) That the respondent solicitor should 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,
ii) That the respondent solicitor do deliver to Fair & Murtagh Solicitors all or any documents, files and papers in his possession or within his procurement arising from his practice as a solicitor, including all ledger cards and funds held for and on behalf of clients files,
iii) That the Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings in the High Court and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.