20 February, 2007

Unethical Lawyers?

The Chief Minister laid down a challenge when we met on Friday last. He said that I was not really dealing with corruption and lack of ethics until I dealt with the legal profession. I told him I accepted the challenge. If I could find any evidence of unethical conduct, I would expose it, and more.

So, now I am extending to you my readers an invitation to help me meet his challenge. Do you know of any lawyer in Anguilla who has done anything illegal, corrupt or unethical? Send me the details. I undertake not to mention your name unless you ask me to do so.

Do you know of any lawyer who has received money for someone and refused or been unable to pay it back?

Do you know of any lawyer who has represented a client in a land purchase and ended up buying the property himself or herself?

Do you know of any lawyer who as advised on administering an estate and ended up owning the assets?

Do you know of any lawyer who has done anything that he or she ought to go to jail for?

Do you know of any lawyer who should, in your opinion, be struck off the roll of lawyers or be fined or suspended?

If you were the one who was damaged, I shall advise you on how to go about getting full compensation for any loss suffered. I shall assist you in bringing the lawyer to justice. I shall stand by your side when you go to the authorities to make your complaint, if that is what you want to do. I shall publish the story on the Blog, if that is what you want. Just send me the details. Let us show the Chief Minister that we are concerned about ethics and integrity at all levels of society in Anguilla, particularly including the legal profession!


  1. The judge has already given the verdict. Read it and weep:

    I heard Keithley gave back the money.

    So that's all right then?

  2. It has been pointed out that the hyperlink for Maxine Herbert’s case is incomplete in the above posting. I am going to try to get it to appear here: http://www.eccourts.org/decisions/new/MaxineHerbert-
    WebstervVernonVieraetalecsc1506.htm. Otherwise, you go to the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court’s website: http://www.eccourts.org/ by cutting and pasting the URL into your browser, go to “Judgments” in the left hand panel, and search for any named party. Use the advanced search feature, and search in “judgments”.


  3. The consent Order

    [19] Counsel for the Defendants has sought to suggest that the Claimants have sought by the raising of the issues herein to impugn the Consent Order. I do not consider that there is any merit in this argument as the matters clearly arise out of the Consent Order and not in any way as a challenge thereto. How else is it to be determined as to whether there has been due compliance with the terms thereof by the Defendants unless the terms thereof are duly interpreted. In my view, the Claimants have sought to do no more than this.


    [20]Based upon the foregoing, I determine the preliminary issues as follows:

    (1)VV and KL are not entitled to exercise a lien over monies which have come into their hands, custody or possession or into the hands, custody or possession of any persons for them in their capacity as Attorney Administrators.

    (2)The so-called Retainer Agreement dated 4th March1996 for fees due to VV and KL is not enforceable by them either in their capacity as Attorney Administrators or in their simultaneous capacity as solicitors for themselves in the capacity as Attorney Aministrators.

    (3)VV and KL are entitled to charge the Estate for work done on behalf of the Estate in respect of their services rendered prior to their appointment as Administrators.

    (4)In light of aforesaid determinations, KL and VV ought to disgorge themselves of all monies retained by them out of the Estate as fees, whether as Attorney Administrators or as solicitors for themselves as Attorney Administrators, save for monies charged for fees pursuant to paragraph (3) hereof and all out of pocket expenses.

    [21]Finally, as neither counsel has raised the question of costs, and taking into account all the circumstances giving rise to these issues I think it appropriate to make no order as to costs. I am grateful to counsel on both sides for their able assistance.


    Janice M. George-Creque

    High Court Judge


  4. Dear Mitchell,
    Please investigate this matter and say whether this ethical or unethical and if this situation is a matter for the attention of the Chief Justice.
    On 13th July 2006 civil Case #43/2006 was filed between T L C Claimant and I S Defendant. On the 8/9/06 attorney at law Paulette Harrigan filed a defence on behalf of the defendant.
    On the 3/11/06 Civil case #82/2006 between D Smith as Claimant and I Smith the defendant was filed by Paulette Harrigan as solicitor for the Claimant. Now I S is the said defendant in civil case #43/2006 whom she filed a defence for. and it is all dealing with the same subject a "right of way". I undestand the Judge was not easy on her in the court about the ethics of the profession.

  5. Don

    was there any follow up on the Febraury 20, 2007 post?


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.