Meeting of the Qualification Commission

On March 14, 2024, the regular meeting of the Qualification Commission of the Chamber of Advocates of the Samara Region was held.

The agenda of the meeting included six disciplinary proceedings for consideration, two of which were initiated upon a court report, one - upon the submission of the Vice President of the Chamber of Advocates of the Samara Region, and three - upon complaints from clients.

The second part of the agenda was the acceptance of the qualification exam for assigning the status of an advocate from 18 applicants who successfully passed the computer testing.

Five proceedings were considered on the merits: in one case, the Commission came to the conclusion that it was necessary to terminate it due to the reconciliation of the advocate and the applicant, one was postponed for reasons recognized by the Commission as valid, in the remaining cases, violations were found in the actions of the advocates.

*****

From the appeal of the Avtozavodsky District Court of Tolyatti, it follows that it is handling a criminal case consisting of 183 volumes. The court hearings are attended by two state prosecutors, 14 defendants and their defense attorneys, including attorney B. The dates of the court hearings for 2024 have been agreed upon with the participants in the process in December 2023, a schedule of court hearings has been drawn up, with which the participants in the process have been familiarized by personal signature. The attendance of four witnesses was ensured at the court hearing scheduled for 19.01.2023 at 10:00, however, the hearing did not take place due to the failure of attorney B. to appear. The case materials include an extract from order No. 1, according to which attorney B. was granted leave with travel outside the Samara Region from 15.01.2023 to 25.01.2024. The court stated that the failure of lawyer B. to appear at the court hearing in accordance with the agreed schedule constitutes disrespect for the court and all participants in the proceedings, contributes to the unreasonable delay of the criminal proceedings, jeopardizing compliance with the requirements of Art. 6.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

Lawyer B. submitted explanations to the Commission in which he disagrees with the arguments presented in the court's appeal and believes that no violations are found in his actions.

The Qualification Commission unanimously found that the lawyer's actions constituted a disciplinary offense, expressed in his failure to appear at the court hearing, the date and time of which had been deliberately agreed upon with all participants in the process, in the absence of prior notification of the court about the impossibility of appearing. The Commission, having concluded that the lawyer violated Art. 14 KPEA, indicated the inadmissibility of such actions on the part of lawyers, since they undermine respect for the activities of a lawyer and the legal profession as a whole, discredit a lawyer as a participant in legal proceedings, and cause significant harm to the authority of the legal profession as an institution of civil society.

*****

From the appeal of the Samara District Court of Samara, it follows that the court is handling a criminal case against Sh., whose defense attorney is lawyer D. The court hearing on 01/22/2023 was postponed to 01/24/2024 at the request of lawyer D. to provide video materials, the court asked the defendant to be prepared for questioning. The court hearing on 01/24/2024 was postponed to 02/01/2024 at 11:00 am at the request of lawyer D. to prepare for the interrogation of the defendant, since the lawyer has not fully familiarized herself with the case materials. Lawyer D. did not appear at the court hearing on 01.02.2024, having filed a motion with the court to postpone the court hearing until 15.02.2024 due to her being busy with other cases in various courts scheduled for 01.02.2024 from 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., as well as due to being on vacation outside Samara from 02.02.2024 to 12.02.2024, and due to being busy with other cases on 13.02.2024, 14.02.2024, 19.02.2024, 20.02.2024, 21.02.2024. In its message, the court indicated that lawyer D., when filing a motion to postpone the court hearing until 01.02.2024, deliberately failed to report that she was busy with other cases on that day and that she was on vacation, in order to delay the consideration of the case. The lawyer's actions resulted in a long-term postponement of the court hearing and a violation of reasonable time limits for criminal proceedings, as well as a violation of the rights and interests of the victims to a timely consideration of the case.

These circumstances are confirmed by the copies of the minutes of the court hearings submitted by the court, to which the lawyer did not submit comments in the prescribed manner, as well as by the lawyer's explanations and the documents she submitted.

The commission found that the actions of lawyer D. constituted a disciplinary offense, indicating that, in accordance with paragraph 5, part 9, of the Code of Professional Ethics of a Lawyer, a lawyer does not have the right to accept orders to provide legal assistance in an amount that is obviously greater than the lawyer is able to fulfill; in accordance with part 3, of Art. 10 KPEA a lawyer must not accept an assignment if its execution will interfere with the execution of another, previously accepted assignment.

******

From the complaint of citizen P. it was seen that on 19.12.2023, lawyer M., in accordance with Art. 50 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, took part in the interrogation of the applicant as an accused of committing a crime. The applicant indicates that the lawyer did not provide any explanations or consultations, the lawyer's legal assistance was limited to the formal signing of the protocol of the investigative action. During familiarization with the materials of the criminal case together with the defense attorney by agreement, the applicant learned that in 2020, lawyer M. participated in the in absentia presentation of charges against P., did not bring any objections or comments regarding the violation of the rights and interests of the client, and did not appeal the ruling. In addition, the materials of the criminal case do not contain a lawyer's order confirming M.'s authority in the case.

Lawyer M. submitted explanations and lawyer proceedings to the Commission. In his explanations, the lawyer indicated that in 2020, in accordance with Art. 50 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, he took part in bringing charges against P., who was wanted. He did not appeal the decision to bring P. as an accused, since he did not know P.'s position on the charges brought against him - whether she would admit guilt or not. On 12/19/2023, he took part in the interrogation of the applicant as an accused of committing a crime. During the conversation, the latter was explained her rights, the essence of the charges brought against her, Art. 51 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and she admitted guilt in full. He believes that there are no violations in his actions.

The Commission found violations of the legislation on advocacy and the Bar in the actions of lawyer M., the Standard for the implementation of defense by a lawyer in criminal proceedings, adopted by the VIII All-Russian Congress of Advocates

******

From the complaint of citizen K. against lawyer S. it follows that the lawyer, who in April 2023 accepted the instruction to represent the interests of the applicant in civil proceedings for the collection of alimony for the maintenance of a minor child in a fixed monetary amount, did not take any legally significant actions to fulfill the instruction, and for a long time misled the client regarding the filing of the statement of claim and the course of its consideration by the court. The applicant also pointed out the improper execution of the relationship with her by the lawyer, since the agreement on the provision of legal assistance was concluded with lawyer S., and the remuneration was paid by means of money transfers in the amount of 15,000 rubles and 1,600 rubles in the name of FULL NAME, 1,500 rubles - in the name of FULL NAME1.

On the merits of the complaint filed by lawyer S., explanations were provided in which the lawyer acknowledges the violations committed in full, indicates that the claim has currently been filed with the court and accepted by the court for proceedings.

The commission found in the actions of lawyer S. the presence of a disciplinary offense.

*****

Fifteen applicants successfully passed the qualification exam and were invited to take the oath at a meeting of the Council of the Chamber of Advocates of the Samara Region, which will be held on 03/28/2024.

PASO Press Center