THE Law Society of Scotland, which represents Scotland’s legal profession, has lost an Appeal Court decision in a case it brought against the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC), which handles complaints against lawyers.
The Law Society had challenged the SLCC’s decision on the way it categorises complaints.
Under a law passed in 2007, complaints to the SLCC, which is the gateway organisation for all legal complaints in Scotland, were categorised as "service" or "conduct" complaints.
The latter were passed to the Law Society, which has the duty to regulate the profession and can refer misconduct to the independent Scottish Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, which can strike off lawyers if the offence is particularly serious.
The SLCC has the power to investigate service complaints, looking into the quality of work a solicitor has carried out during the course of a transaction.
The SLCC, however, had begun to classify the complaints as “hybrid” and the Law Society objected and took a test case to the Court of Session.
Last August, the Court of Session ruled that single issues within a legal complaint must be categorised as either service or conduct. The SLCC’s practice of classifying an issue as both was ruled unlawful.
Hundreds of such complaints have been in limbo awaiting the Appeal Court’s view, which has now been delivered.
Lords Glennie and Turnbull in the majority opinion said the SLCC had the power as a matter of law to re-categorise complaints and that it was not “unreasonable or irrational” to do so.
The other appeal judge Lady Paton, pictured above, disagreed, saying the Law Society’s appeal should be allowed because the 2007 Act was "a precise and prescriptive statute."
For the majority view, Lord Turnbull said in his written opinion: “The import of the argument advanced by the Law Society is that an administrative decision of this sort, once made by the Commission, cannot be changed or corrected, even if the Commission recognises that it has been made unlawfully. I cannot accept that this is an accurate statement applicable to all circumstances.”
A spokesman for the SLCC said its board would meet early next week to discuss the judgment and would provide further comment after the meeting.
A Law Society of Scotland spokesperson said: “Our concern throughout this process has been to protect the integrity of the complaints process.
"The court has now issued us with a detailed judgment and one which deserves careful consideration before any decisions are taken.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here