Understanding Solicitors' Duties to the Court: A Legal Report

This report provides a detailed analysis of the various duties imposed on solicitors within the legal profession, emphasizing their ethical and legal obligations to the court. It examines the regulatory framework, including the role of professional bodies in supervising solicitors' conduct and ensuring adherence to ethical standards. The report categorizes these duties into four major types: the general duty of disclosure, the duty to not abuse court processes, the duty to avoid corrupting the administration of justice, and the duty to conduct cases efficiently. It explores the evolving nature of these duties, considering changes in community standards and the impact of court decisions. The report also addresses jurisdictional issues, including the courts' powers to enforce these duties and the potential for sanctions against solicitors who breach them. Finally, it underscores the solicitor's critical role in the adversarial system and the importance of balancing client interests with the overarching duty to the court and the efficient administration of justice.

Word

Table of Contents
5.1 TASK ........................................................................................................................................3
REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................................7

5.1 TASK
It has been analysed that there are several kinds of duties imposed on the people who are
practising for the legal profession. Solicitors need to comply with the ethical duties that are
usually been laid down and to be supervised by the professional bodies that is empowered by the
statute for regulating and monitoring profession (VanBuskirk and Filliter, 2020). Such ethical
duties govern the manner in which profession is ranged and conducted from duties relating to
etiquette of the behaviour between the lawyers and the person who are requires honesty & good
faith in dealing with clients.
Under general law, fiduciary, contractual or the tortious duties might be imposed on the
solicitors. Contractual duties mainly arises out of the relationships between solicitors and their
respective clients, as do fiduciary & tortious duties, that might also stem from the relationship of
lawyers with the reliable third parties. Additional to it, lawyers owes the duties towards the court,
but, this does not mean that the duties are been owed to the particular or specific judge.
On contrary, duties of such kind in reality owed to larger society that shows crucial
public interest within proper administration of the justice. Such public interest is indeed as the
source of such duties and court to enforce them, acts as the guardian & trustee with respect to
diligent administration of the justice (Kritzer, 2017). For this reason, the courts are assumed to
have an inherent power for imposing such duties. The underlying principle relating to such
quotation is stated as “the court have right and the duty for supervising conduct of those that
appears prior to it and visiting with the penalties that any conduct of the lawyer which seems as
of such nature in order to defeat justice in cause within which he or she is engaged as
professional.
As per the duties owed by the lawyers to court are the legal duties that is imposed by
general law. They deemed as personal in the nature and could not be delegated. They are not the
duties that owed to an individual or the parties to the litigation, nor they are depicted as ethical
duties like those supervised in the England by Inns of the court, law society and the Bar council.
The ethical regulations of such bodies does not determine nature of the duties owed as matter of
the law to court. Breach of the duty owed to court give rise to the unlawful conduct that might
not necessarily be as unethical.
Role of Solicitors has always been important for achievement of the justice under
adversarial system. Accuracy of the Lord Eldon's well-known quotation that the truth is been

discovered by the powerful statements on both the sides of question but is succinctly
encapsulated significance of the efficiency and Zeal on part of lawyers. The judge's power in
finding truth mainly depends on ability and desire of parties, it is the duty of solicitor to lay all
relevant facts before court (Sklar and et.al., 2019). The underlying objective of layers duties to
court is to protect an administration of the justice by way of empowering court in enforcing the
appropriate behaviour by the lawyers for the purpose of achieving such end.
The process whereby the professional bodies discipline and monitors improvement or
development in the lawyer, however, they remain as relatively slow & cumbersome. The
concerned regulatory bodies and ethical rules that they administer serves as an important purpose
that is maintenance of the adequate ethical standards of the behaviour in a legal profession. The
foremost objective of this report is to attempt for gathering and categorizing principal duties so
that they could form something that approaches coherent as a whole. Referring to this, duties
have been categorized into four major types that involves general duty of the disclosure owed to
court, general duty towards not abusing the process of court, general duty in relation to not
corrupting an administration of the justice and general duty for conducting the cases
expeditiously & efficiently.
In course of categorize duties, content of the specific duties is been presented. These
duties are been derived from public interest in ensuring that an administration of the justice is not
been distorted or subverted by inefficient, obstructive and dishonest practices (Burke and
Zillmann, 2018). Essence of such duties is the main requirement for the solicitors in acting
professionally with the scrupulous fairness, integrity & aid court for promoting cause of the
justice. With their nature, such requirements are seen as immutable, but content of specific duties
that flows from might change over the time as the litigation practices & change in social values.
On other side, general duty towards conducting the cases efficiently itself shows current
changes in the community standards & attitudes. Such changes altered demands that is made on
the lawyers by courts. For instance- In 1996, Brennan v/s Brighton B.C. Case, Lord Woolf held
that the lawyers has the duty to not waste the money and time along with bringing case to the
trial as soon as possible. It was not something that is expected of the lawyers in time of Lord
Eldon's and the new duties comes up with the changes in demand made on lawyers are been
commented on.

The solicitor in adversary system have several duties that are potentially inconsistent with
one another that is to act zealously for advance the client's interest, to keep the information of the
client as confidential and to act candour and honest to court. Other problems or issues dealt with
the jurisdiction of court for enforcing the duties owed to it, growing needs for the judges for
intervening more actively in process of litigation for ensuring compliance with the duties &
availability of immunity of counsel from the claim for the negligence.
In England, it has been viewed that at the time when solicitors are working as officers of
court, barristers cannot work. This is mainly based on a fact that, in England, functions of the
disciplining barristers does not directly remain in hands of courts, but left to Inns of the Court
and Bar council. With regard to this statement, It has been identified that Lord Reid in case of
Rondel v/s Worsley reflected that at the time of dealing with duties of barrister to court, noting
that the counsel as officer of court is concerned with administration of the justice also have
overriding duty towards court. It has been seen that whatever be the position in England as
whether the barristers are officers of court, both solicitors & barristers owe duties to court. In
other common law countries, no such difference is been made between the solicitors and
barristers, both are counted as court officers and both owes to the duties.
Until a change to the section 51 of Supreme Court Act 1981, judiciary in the England do
not have the power for imposing the compensatory sanctions on the barristers against the breach
of their duties to court, although the solicitors were been susceptible to the compensatory orders
(Drewry, 2018). Currently, In England, the court has wide powers under the Order 62, Rule
11(1) for making the wasted cost orders over both solicitors and the barristers. For indicating
breach of such duty, it is not essential for establishing criminal conduct, dishonesty, personal
obliquity or the behaviour like warrant striking the solicitor off the roll.
When the compensatory order is been sought, some casual connection need to be shown
between conduct complained of & costs sought for recovery. In other countries where the duties
to court have been breached, courts have inherent powers in making similar orders against the
solicitors and barristers. The Jurisdiction of court in this context encompasses with inherent and
statutory powers that is exercised by Court of Wales and England. The court jurisdiction seems
as punitive and compensatory as it is been noted that in adequate cases costs might be directed
against the counsel or the solicitors for the party where they have acted in improper way and

have abused processes of court or had otherwise acted as contrary with respect to their
obligations as officers of court or inconsistently with their audience right before court.
In light of modern conditions, it has been analysed that over-burdened legal system
should also consider need to do for justice to those persons who had been waiting for their cases
to hear. The duty in taking each and every possible point may be a duty owed by the lawyers to
client, paramount duty to court is for advancing only the points which are reasonably arguable.
Moreover, a Barrister's duty in court reflects the fact that course of the litigation depends on
exercise by the counsel of independent discretion or the judgement in management and conduct
of the case in which he is having an eye, not only to his customer's success, but also to efficient
and speedy administration of the justice.

REFERENCES
Books and journal
Burke, J. and Zillmann, H., 2018. Creating a gold standard for practical legal training in common
law countries. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 5. p.9.
Drewry, G., 2018. Lawyers in UK Central Government: Key Specialists in a Generalist
Bureaucratic Culture. Osaka University Law Review. 65. pp.25-46.
Kritzer, H. M., 2017. Lawyers’ professional liability: comparative perspectives. International
Journal of the Legal Profession. 24(2). pp.73-89.
Sklar, T. and et.al., 2019. Characteristics of Lawyers Who Are Subject to Complaints and
Misconduct Findings. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies. 16(2). pp.318-342.
VanBuskirk, K. and Filliter, G., 2020. An examination of the effectiveness of Readers’ Theatre
as a teaching strategy in legal education. The Law Teacher. 54(1). pp.129-148.