A lawyer has been suspended from practice for a year after admitting he withdrew a client’s property claim against his ex-wife without telling him, and went to work for the law firm that was representing her.
The Advocates’ Disciplinary Board ruled on 9 November, after a complaint by the client, a man from Paphos. The lawyer admitted all eight charges against him.
The client had hired the lawyer to handle his financial disputes with his former wife. On or around 10 June 2021, when the client’s property disputes application was due to be heard at Paphos Family Court, the lawyer withdrew it without prejudice, without instructions from the client and without telling him.
The client only found out in the last two months of 2023, through his own inquiries. By then his claim had become time-barred, and he suffered substantial loss because he had no chance to take steps to protect his rights.
In 2024 he sued the lawyer, and a consent judgment ordered the lawyer to pay him 78,000 euros in damages.
Conflict of interest
While still representing the client, the lawyer took a job at the law firm that was representing the client’s former wife at Paphos Family Court. He did not tell his client or say that this prevented him from continuing to act for him. As a result, both the client and his ex-wife were represented by the same firm, in breach of the rule that a lawyer must not act for more than one client in the same case where there is a conflict of interest or a serious risk of one.
The three-member board said the lawyer should at least have told his client about the change in his circumstances and the obstacle it created. It said that failure was in itself a serious breach of professional ethics, regardless of whether any use of confidential information had been proven.
The lawyer also failed to register with the Paphos District Land Registry an interim order issued by Paphos Family Court on 15 February 2019 in the client’s favour. The order barred the ex-wife from transferring or disposing of her share of a house in a Paphos village.
The lawyer’s explanation
The lawyer said he had withdrawn the application because he believed the client could not prove his claim. The board said this did not justify his action and could not be accepted as a mitigating factor. Instead, it showed he had taken a step that was decisive for the case on his own judgement, without the involvement or consent of the person whose rights he was meant to protect.
The board attached particular importance to the fact that the client learnt of the withdrawal so late, saying the failure to tell him in time deprived him of the chance to assess the situation and protect his interests.
It found that withdrawing proceedings arbitrarily without the client’s knowledge or instructions, failing to disclose a serious risk of conflict of interest and failing to protect his property interests amounted to conduct incompatible with the fundamental requirements of the legal profession.
