http://www.hk-lawyer.org/en/article.asp?articleid=3119&c=121
Hearing Dates: 4 and 5 June 2014 Findings and Order: 13 August 2014
Having considered the affidavit filed by the Law Society and the exhibits thereto and given the admission of the Respondent to the First to Fourth Complaints and the Respondent’s Agreed Facts, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (“Tribunal”) found the Respondent guilty of First to Fourth Complaints.
The Complaints laid against the Respondent were as follows:
First Complaint
Between 1 April 2007 and 31 December 2009, whilst the Respondent was the sole proprietor of Messrs. Tse and Associates (the “Firm”), he breached Rule 10(1) and (2) of the SAR in that despite repeated warnings by the Law Society, the Respondent had failed to keep properly written up books and accounts. The books and accounts kept by the Firm were not complete and failed to:
i) show all dealings with clients’ money held, received or paid by the Respondent and any other money dealt with by the Respondent through a client account; and
ii) to distinguish such money held, received or paid by the Respondent on any other account.
All these dealings should have been recorded in the books and accounts within three working days after the date of such dealings.
Second Complaint
Between 1 April 2007 and 31 December 2009 (or within such shorter period or periods during these years), the Respondent failed to provide any monthly reconciliation statements of client accounts and listing of client ledger balances in accordance with Rule 10A of the SAR.
Third Complaint
The Respondent and the Firm, breached Rule 5B(1) and (2) of the SPR and Rule 11(1) and (2) of the SAR, in that the Respondent had failed to produce such books of account, bank passbooks, bank statements, statements of account, vouchers every three months for the period of two years between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2009 as required by the Law Society in pursuance of its resolution recorded in its letter dated 31 January 2008.
Fourth Complaint
The Respondent breached Rule 2(d) of the SPR in that he had persistently failed to maintain proper accounting documents and records over a substantial period of time and ignored the requests and warnings made by the Law Society in respect of the provision of accounting documents and such conduct was unbefitting of a solicitor under the common law.
The Tribunal, having considered the Respondent’s submissions in mitigation, ordered, inter alia, that:
(1) In respect of the First Complaint, the Respondent be fined HK$25,000;
(2) In respect of the Second Complaint, the Respondent be fined HK$15,000;
(3) In respect of the Third Complaint, the Respondent be:
(i) censured;
(ii) fined HK$40,000; and
(iii) suspended from practice as a solicitor for a period of one year, and after the said period of one year, the Respondent be allowed to practise only as an assistant solicitor, but not as a sole proprietor or partner, for a period of three years under the supervision of a solicitor of not less than ten years’ good standing;
(ii) fined HK$40,000; and
(iii) suspended from practice as a solicitor for a period of one year, and after the said period of one year, the Respondent be allowed to practise only as an assistant solicitor, but not as a sole proprietor or partner, for a period of three years under the supervision of a solicitor of not less than ten years’ good standing;
(4) In respect of the Fourth Complaint, the Respondent be:
(i) censured;
(ii) fined HK$50,000; and
(iii) suspended from practice as a solicitor for a period of one year, and after the said period of one year, the Respondent be allowed to practise only as an assistant solicitor, but not as a sole proprietor or partner, for a period of three years under the supervision of a solicitor of not less than ten years’ good standing.
(ii) fined HK$50,000; and
(iii) suspended from practice as a solicitor for a period of one year, and after the said period of one year, the Respondent be allowed to practise only as an assistant solicitor, but not as a sole proprietor or partner, for a period of three years under the supervision of a solicitor of not less than ten years’ good standing.
For the Third and Fourth Complaints, where periods of suspension from practice are imposed, such periods shall run concurrently (which shall result in a suspension for a total period of 12 months).
(5) The Respondent shall over the period of 36 months commencing from the date of his suspension, enrol in courses amounting to no less than 20 RME points related to the practice of solicitor’s accounts under the Compulsory Professional Development programme run by the Law Society; this sentence imposed upon the Respondent is in addition to the yearly RME requirements that the Respondent has to comply with; written approval shall be sought from the Law Society as to whether any course fits the purpose of the Tribunal’s Order dated 13 August 2014 and permission for which, from the Law Society shall not be unreasonably refused. Provided always that no less than six such points must be earned within the period of 12 months commencing from the date of his suspension; and no less than 14 such points must have been earned within 24 months commencing from the date of his suspension;
(6) The Respondent is to pay the fine above totalling HK$130,000 by monthly instalments with the first instalment of HK$10,000 to be paid on or before 31 August 2014 and the balance of HK$120,000 by 12 monthly instalments of HK$10,000 each to be paid on or before the last day of each month thereafter; and
(7) The Respondent shall pay the costs of the Law Society of these proceedings, and the costs of the Tribunal’s clerk, to be taxed if not agreed on an indemnity basis.
_______________
聆訊日期: 2014年6月4日及5日 裁斷及命令: 2014年8月13日
律師紀律審裁組(下稱「審裁組」)經考慮律師會送交存檔的誓章和所附證物後，基於答辯人承認第一至第四項申訴內容屬實及他的同意事實書，裁定答辯人犯了第一至第四項申訴所指的違規事項。
針對答辯人提出的申訴如下：
第一項申訴
答辯人於2007年4月1日至2009年12月31日期間，他是謝錦1762.jpg律師事務所(「律師行」)的獨營執業者之時，雖然被律師會三番四次警告，但仍不備存妥為詳細記敘的簿冊和帳目，違反了《律師帳目規則》(第159F章)(「《帳目規則》」)第10(1)及(2)條的規定。由律師行備存的簿冊和帳目均不完整及沒有：
i) 顯示答辯人就他所持有、收取或支付的當事人款項，以及他經由當事人帳戶處理的任何其他款項所作出的所有交易；及
ii) 將上述由答辯人持有、收取或支付的款項與他為任何其他帳戶所持有、收取或支付的款項區分。
上述所有交易都須在交易的日期後三個工作天內記錄在簿冊和帳目之內。
第二項申訴
答辯人在2007年4月1日至2009年12月31日期間(或在這兩年多裡的一段或多段較短期間)沒有按照《帳目規則》第10A條的規定提供當事人帳戶的每月對帳表及列出當事人分類帳結餘的清單。
第三項申訴
根據律師會在其日期為2008年1月31日的信函中所記錄的律師會決議案，律師會要求答辯人於2008年1月1日至2009年12月31日兩年間，每三個月出示一次他的帳簿、銀行存摺簿、銀行結單、帳目報表、付款憑單，但答辯人沒有如此辦，答辯人及律師行因而違反了《律師執業規則》(「《執業規則》」)第5B(1)及(2)條的規定，以及《帳目規則》第11(1)及(2)條的規定。
第四項申訴
答辯人長時間經常不備存妥善的會計文件和記錄，無視律師會要求他提供會計文件及其後就此發出的警告，違反《執業規則》第2(d)條的規定，而且根據普通法，答辯人作出了不合乎律師身分的行為。
審裁組經考慮答辯人的求情陳詞後作出命令，其中包括：
(1) 就第一項申訴，命令答辯人支付罰款港幣25,000元；
(2) 就第二項申訴，命令答辯人支付罰款港幣15,000元；
(3) 就第三項申訴，命令：
(i) 譴責答辯人；
(ii) 答辯人支付罰款港幣40,000元；及
(iii) 暫時吊銷答辯人的律師執業資格一年，一年完結後，答辯人三年內不得出任獨營執業者或合夥人，只可在具有不少於10年良好資歷的律師的監督下從事助理律師工作；
(ii) 答辯人支付罰款港幣40,000元；及
(iii) 暫時吊銷答辯人的律師執業資格一年，一年完結後，答辯人三年內不得出任獨營執業者或合夥人，只可在具有不少於10年良好資歷的律師的監督下從事助理律師工作；
(4) 就第四項申訴，命令：
(i) 譴責答辯人；
(ii) 答辯人支付罰款港幣50,000元；及
(iii) 暫時吊銷答辯人的律師執業資格一年，一年完結後，答辯人三年內不得出任獨營執業者或合夥人，只可在具有不少於10年良好資歷的律師的監督下從事助理律師工作。
就第三和第四項申訴分別判處的暫時吊銷執業資格將同期執行(因此暫時吊銷執業資格共12個月)。(ii) 答辯人支付罰款港幣50,000元；及
(iii) 暫時吊銷答辯人的律師執業資格一年，一年完結後，答辯人三年內不得出任獨營執業者或合夥人，只可在具有不少於10年良好資歷的律師的監督下從事助理律師工作。
(5) 答辯人在被暫時吊銷執業資格之日起計36個月期間，須報讀由律師會在強制性專業進修計劃下開設，且與執業律師帳戶有關的風險管理教育課程，修畢不少於20個學分；這20個學分，是答辯人除了遵照規定每年修讀風險管理教育課程所取得的學分以外，被判處必須額外取得的學分；就審裁組2014年8月13日的頒令的目的而言，其他課程是否合用，須經律師會書面批准予以確定；律師會不得無理拒絕給予批准。但答辯人必須在被暫時吊銷執業資格之日起12個月內，修畢不少於6個學分；在被暫時吊銷執業資格之日起24個月內，修畢不少於14個學分；
(6) 上述罰款合共為港幣130,000元，答辯人須以分期方式繳付，2014年8月31日或之前繳付首期款額港幣10,000元，餘額港幣120,000元分12個月每月最後一天或之前繳付港幣10,000元；及
(7) 答辯人須支付紀律程序費用中律師會的費用，以及審裁組書記費用；如雙方未能就費用金額達成協議，按彌償基準評定。
