Lawyers failed to show up for €100,000 compensation case
Ted Emery was not even told a date had been set and discovered his case had been struck out because of the no-show.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal made two findings of misconduct against one solicitor involved, but only because of the solicitor’s failure to respond promptly when Mr Emery complained.
Paul Derham of Cork city legal firm Daly Derham accepted he delayed in handing over Mr Emery’s file to another solicitor hired to try and sort out the mess. He also accepted that he failed to reply to some letters from the Law Society after Mr Emery lodged a complaint against him.
No financial penalty was imposed on him, however, as the tribunal heard he had previously handled 14 legal transactions successfully for Mr Emery and had not charged for his work.
Daly Derham undertook to pay Mr Emery €2,500 in expenses on top of a €1,000 payment they had already made to him since the tribunal hearing began three years ago.
Mr Derham was cleared of the most serious accusation of negligence by failing to make progress on Mr Emery’s original case which was in his hands for almost 13 years before it collapsed.
Mr Emery, a now retired building and roofing contractor, went to Mr Derham in 1987 for a breach of contract case after a mainly British consortium, who hired him to find a site and arrange planning permission for what is now the Rochestown Park Hotel, pulled out of the venture.
He continued working for the consortium on properties they opted to develop at the Marina Commercial Park instead, but they pulled out of that five months later and the compound was shut down and locked up with Mr Emery’s materials, equipment, car and van stuck inside.
Mr Emery estimated the accumulated costs he incurred from his impounded property, which he never recovered, and loss of livelihood at around €100,000.
Mr Derham pursued a case for compensation against the various companies in the consortium but some had wound up and none entered a defence so a High Court judge found in favour of Mr Emery and a date was set to decide his damages.
Mr Derham used Dublin firm Pearts Solicitors to handle the case while it was being heard in the capital, but the tribunal heard Pearts lost the case papers after judgment was received and then provided confusing reports about when the damages were due for assessment.
Eventually Mr Emery went to the courts office himself in late 1997 to try to find out what was happening and he discovered a date had been set three months earlier, no one had turned up and the case was struck out.
Mr Emery tried unsuccessfully to get Mr Derham to rectify the situation and also contacted Pearts directly but without any luck.
No complaint has been made against Pearts as Mr Derham, as the principle solicitor in the case, must accept responsibility for the actions of his agents.




