I have study the proposed Legal Practitioners Act, 2010 and the object may possibly appear to be excellent, but, it will produce so many issues and additional damage the profession. When it comes improving the legal system, the unfortunate point is that we are not addressing the root issue even though we are interested to make laws. Except the situation of “All India Bar Council Examination” and the issue of Judicial Requirements and Accountability Bill, I have not seen any practical and affordable actions towards correcting our legal system and strengthening it. By reading the provisions of Legal Practitioners Act, 2010, I find that an impression is sought to be produced that consumers are getting cheated by the Legal Practitioners. It is true that there are professionals who cheat the customers and who do not stick to any principles. It is also correct that there are habitual litigants or public whose only job is to play with the legal method and I have personally observed these sorts of litigants. Legal Experts who believe in may well and receiving the issues carried out at any cost may be spared by habitual litigants or public, but, the principled advocates will usually get harassed by the litigants or the public. A single need to not see the legal profession at par with other professions like Healthcare Profession. The partnership among the client and the legal skilled is really complicated and it is very difficult to know as to what has happened among them and a single can not also effortlessly infer items based on versions or based on what has been recorded by the court throughout the course of the proceeding. One particular ought to not defend the lawyers who do not comply with any standards and principles and they should be strictly dealt with. But, at the identical time, it is also essential to protect the legal professionals from the frivolous complaints and it will cause irreparable damage to the legal specialist and it leads to deviation. If the complaints against legal pros sought to be entertained loosely, then, there ought to be stringent provisions against frivolous complainants. We have obsolete fee guidelines and it may require a re-look and revision.
Whilst a disciplinary action is to be taken against the experts clearly deviating from requirements which call for a revision, particular problems can extremely very easily be addressed. As per the practice, if a client wants to modify his advocate, then, he has to get the consent from the advocate concerned. The object behind this mechanism may be very good, but, it is becoming misused. The legal pros may fight for their fees independently, but, they must not be allowed to prevent the client in altering his contractual service. On the exact same footing, a legal skilled ought to be permitted to get discharged from the case on a Memo to the court and on a lot of occasions, legal skilled may possibly have to face harassment from the client or the client might insist the advocate to defend a clearly mis-major case. By taking these straightforward measures, the troubles can be addressed. I am really firm on one particular factor that legal specialists must not forced to serve the public as a charity and it ought to be left to the discretion of the professional concerned. The regulations governing the legal professionals need to be realistic. On the very same lines, Hon’ble Judges may feel that frivolous complaints can be produced against them. But, the only be concerned is that there is no mechanism at all earlier to deal with the clearly corrupt judges and now, it is sought to be addressed.
Plethora of complaints can be filed against the legal specialists if the proposed law is implemented and it doen’t imply that the legal pros are wrong usually and we need to also be aware of the men and women who usually attempt to abuse the method of law. We have customer redressl forums now and everyone knows about the frivolous complaints too. As such, habitual litigants should not be permitted to harass a legal expert and if is allowed to take place, then, it will additional worsen profession. If successful mechanism sought to be established against the legal professionals to deal with the professional indiscipline, then, there must be clear provisions that technicalities be ignored in the course of proceeding and there must be a provision for stringent action against false complaints. There should also be a provision, based on the averments in the complaint, to demand the complainant to supply a bond or guarantee that he will compensate the damage to the expert in the occasion of complaint obtaining proved as false/motivated. I can give lots of examples as to how a legal professional can be an straightforward target for habitual litigants below the cover of customer protection and so on.
I don’t understand the reforms being mooted and I strongly feel that the root difficulties are not being addressed appropriately. We never want eye-wash action and we want concrete steps which will function.
Note: the views expressed are my personal.