Solicitor struck off by High Court over deficit in client funds and no books of account

High Court Reporters

A solicitor has been struck off the professional register by the High Court after being found to have allowed a €72,000 deficit in client funds and failed to maintain any books of account at his practice.

Mr Justice Micheál P O’Higgins said a strike-off order for Sean Brown was necessary to protect the public, to maintain the reputation of the profession and to mark the court’s disapproval of his conduct.

Ruling on Wednesday, the judge said it may be possible for Mr Brown to have his name restored to the roll of solicitors after taking steps to address certain personal issues that affected his work.

Mr Brown practised at Sean Brown Solicitors, in Siena, Clonmore, Togher, Co Louth, until he was suspended by High Court order in late 2017.

Mr Justice O’Higgins said the lawyer, “to his credit”, accepted the allegations made against him by the Law Society and agreed these amounted to professional misconduct.

Following a hearing in February 2023, an independent Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal made various misconduct findings, including regarding his failure to maintain books of account “at all” and his having allowed an apparent deficit of €71,991 in client funds.

The tribunal also said he caused the beneficiaries of a client’s estate to successfully claim from the Law Society’s central compensation fund due to Mr Brown’s failure to distribute the estate despite being requested to do so.

The judge said there were other claims on the compensation fund arising from Mr Brown’s practice. He sent the Law Society a cheque for €5,000, which reduced the fund’s net deficit to just under €35,000.

His failure to pay stamp duty on behalf of separate clients and failure to register six of his clients’ titles to properties also amounted to misconduct, the tribunal found.

The Law Society submitted to the tribunal that anything less than Mr Brown being struck off would expose clients, the public and the profession to great jeopardy.

Mr Justice O’Higgins said Mr Brown asked the tribunal for a more lenient sanction than a strike-off. He admitted he had never been “very good at accounts and balances”, the judge said.

The judge said a report to the tribunal outlined factors in Mr Brown’s personal life that were contributing very negatively to his business life.

The report said the solicitor has been trying his best to overcome these issues.

The tribunal recommended to the High Court that Mr Brown was not fit to practise as a solicitor, that his name should be struck from the solicitors’ roll and that he should be ordered to pay €5,000 as a contribution towards the Law Society’s investigation.

The Law Society, represented by barrister Eoghan O’Sullivan and solicitor David Irwin, asked the court to make the recommended orders.

Mr Brown did not participate in the High Court application and was not in court for the judgment.

Mr Justice O’Higgins said mitigating factors included Mr Brown’s efforts to overcome his personal difficulties that “appear to lie at the root of [his] offending”. He had also shown some level of insight by making admissions and has no previous misconduct findings, the judge said.

However, he said, a strike-off order was reasonable and proportionate and made the orders sought.

He added that he “sincerely hope[s]” Mr Brown will in future be in a position to apply to restore his name to the professional register.