Knowledge and quality testing

On November 16, 2023, the regular meeting of the Qualification Commission of the Chamber of Advocates of the Samara Region was held.

The main item on the agenda was the qualification exam for the assignment of the status of an advocate for 23 applicants.

Twenty applicants successfully passed the oral interview and were invited to take the oath at the meeting of the Council of the Chamber of Advocates of the Samara Region, which will be held on November 30, 2023.

*****

The agenda of the meeting determined six disciplinary proceedings for consideration, one of which was initiated at the request of the court, one - at the request of the Office of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation for the Samara Region, four - at the complaint of clients.

Five proceedings were considered on the merits. In two cases, the Commission came to the conclusion that they needed to be terminated due to the absence of violations in the actions of the advocates, in the remaining cases, violations were found in the actions of the advocates.

One disciplinary proceeding was postponed due to the need to submit additional materials.

*****

From the appeal of a judge of one of the district courts of Moscow it followed that lawyer Yu., representing the interests of the defendant R. in criminal proceedings by agreement, did not appear at court hearings on February 20, March 2, 9, 22, 30, April 17, 26, 28, May 11, 18, 23. The defendant claimed that the agreement with lawyer Yu. was not terminated. The court indicated that due to the lawyer's failure to appear at court hearings, the dates of which were agreed upon in advance, the hearings were disrupted. The court regarded the actions of lawyer Yu. as a manifestation of disrespect for the court and other participants in the process.

Lawyer Yu. presented explanations that refute the arguments set out in the court's appeal.

Attached to the explanations is a petition from the defendant, from which it is evident that an agreement was made between him and the lawyer that the defense of his interests up to a certain stage of the proceedings would be represented by a second lawyer participating in the case by agreement. Lawyer Yu. notified the court of the client's position.

The commission came to the conclusion that the presence of one of the two lawyers by agreement did not prevent the consideration of the case on the merits. No complaints from the client about the actions of lawyer Yu. were received by the Chamber of Advocates.

The commission came to the conclusion that there was no disciplinary offense in the lawyer's actions.

******

It follows from the submission of the Department of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation for the Samara Region that the Department received information from the Investigative Department of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation for the Samara Region regarding lawyer V., who, being the defense attorney of the accused in a criminal case, on 12.07.2023 refused to sign the protocol of notification of the completion of investigative actions and left the investigator's office. In the protocol of notification of completion of investigative actions, the lawyer personally indicated in the line "Statements" "received", however, "the protocol does not contain comments from the lawyer". The Department believes that the above information about the actions of lawyer V. discredits the honor and dignity inherent in the profession of a lawyer, damages the authority of the Bar and indicates that the lawyer violated the legislation on the Bar.

Lawyer V. submitted explanations to the commission in which he indicates the absence of any violations in his actions, consistently and reasonably refuting the arguments set out in the submission

As a result of a lengthy discussion, the Commission came to the conclusion that there were no violations in the actions of lawyer V. and the need to terminate disciplinary proceedings.

******

It follows from the complaint of the General Director of LLC "A" that on September 15, 2021, an agreement was concluded between the Company and lawyer L. to represent the interests of the LLC in the arbitration case on the insolvency (bankruptcy) of LLC "E". According to the terms of the agreement and the additional agreement dated December 9, 2021, the Lawyer accepted the assignment to carry out a number of legal procedures. The Principal fulfilled the obligation to pay the fee in full by transferring the amount of 2,000,000 rubles to the Lawyer's personal account. The Lawyer failed to fulfill the obligations, namely: he did not represent the interests of the Principal in court hearings in the arbitration case on the insolvency (bankruptcy) of LLC "E", did not ensure the participation of the Principal in auctions. One of the violations committed by the lawyer is that he accepted the assignment, the result of which should have been the acquisition by the Principal at the auction of the rights to claim debt collection. Meanwhile, achieving the specified result is beyond the legal competence of the lawyer, does not depend on the lawyer, and is determined solely by the expression of will of the meeting of bankruptcy creditors in the debtor's bankruptcy case.

In connection with the identified deficiencies, the Client sent the lawyer a pre-trial claim for the return of the paid funds, which was not satisfied, which served as a reason for the Client to apply to the court with a claim against the lawyer.

The decision on the case was in favor of the Client.

The lawyer did not submit an explanation or lawyer's file to the Commission.

The Commission came to the conclusion that the lawyer's actions constituted a disciplinary offense, indicating that the lawyer had violated financial discipline (the fee was not credited), did not fulfill obligations under the agreement, thereby violating the requirements of the Federal Law "On Advocacy and the Bar in the Russian Federation" and the Code of Professional Activity of a Lawyer.

*****

It follows from the complaint of citizen Z. that in November 2022, she entered into an agreement with lawyer M. for the provision of legal assistance, the subject of which was the lawyer's representation of her interests in the division of property jointly acquired with her ex-husband. Under the agreement, the lawyer was to prepare a draft statement of claim and represent her interests in the court of first instance. The applicant transferred the funds to the lawyer in full, and a notarized power of attorney was issued. On January 31, 2023, the lawyer "sent" the draft claim to the client's e-mail for review and the details for paying the state fee. After paying the state fee, the lawyer assured the client that the claim had been filed in court and scheduled for consideration. Later, in May 2023, the lawyer reported that due to the husband's failure to appear, the hearing was postponed, and at the end of May, he did the same. In August 2023, it turned out that the lawyer periodically named fictitious dates for court hearings, and he did not file a claim with the court. The actions of lawyer M. led to the expiration of the statute of limitations, as stated by the defendant. The claim was filed by another lawyer - not a lawyer, as emphasized in the complaint. According to the applicant, lawyer M. violated the client's rights to timely qualified assistance, which indicates the negligence of the lawyer. The applicant assessed the business qualities of the lawyer as negative as possible and expressed doubts about the professional viability of the law firm.

The lawyer presented explanations that do not deny the factual circumstances set out in the complaint. The lawyer indicated that he admits guilt, returned the fee and compensation to the applicant upon first request.

The commission came to the conclusion that there were violations in the lawyer's actions that constitute a disciplinary offense.

******

It follows from the complaint of citizen P. that in May 2023 she contacted lawyer F. for help in recognizing the will as invalid. Since the applicant does not live in Samara, all negotiations with the lawyer were conducted via telephone and WhatsApp. When she called for the first time, she explained the situation. The parties discussed the amount of the fee. The lawyer was in touch the entire time before the payment was made, “and was very eager to pay, showed interest in the process.” After the funds were transferred to the account, “the lawyer seemed to have changed. He stopped answering calls and messages, and absolutely did not do what he was paid for.” The lawyer was offered to return the money and part ways, but the lawyer still sent the claim to court. The claim was drawn up with errors that were corrected “with great difficulty.” The claim was accepted for proceedings, a hearing was scheduled. The lawyer came to the hearing unprepared, did not present the documents received in advance from the Principal in the case, and did not contact the witnesses. In August, he called and asked for more money, to which the applicant refused. After which, the lawyer "stopped communicating, does not answer calls or messages, and does not take any action on the case."

The lawyer did not submit an explanation, lawyer's file, or balance sheet to the Commission.

The Commission unanimously concluded that the lawyer's actions constituted a disciplinary offense.

PASO Press Center