Solicitor refusing to represent

[medsecslave]

My ex husband is due back in Court next week on a charge of drink driving. It was on private land. He's already been to Court and the witnesses have been called but is unhappy with the way his solicitor has conducted the case and told her he wants to speak up. She's said she'll defend him only on the private land issue and that for him to speak up will cause her professional embarrassment. On that basis with him still insisting on speaking up, she's pulled out. I've advised him against putting his own case forward but he won't be told - can he have the case adjourned whilst he obtains another solicitor?

[New Judge]

Most unlikely.

It will be for the magistrates to decide whether or not to grant an adjournment, but generally Courts expect all parties to be ready to proceed. The Bench will most probably take the view that this issue should have been identified and solved some time ago.

Most solicitors would adopt the same line as your husband�s. In addition, most Benches will not permit a represented defendant to address the court (except when giving their own evidence in their defence). This is as much for the defendant�s benefit as anything else, as they could compromise the defence case if they say something they should not.

Best find another solicitor pronto, but of course he may find the same problem occurs.

Just out of interest, did this alleged offence occur on private land that was also not a �public place� for the purposes of the Road Traffic Act. If so, why was he charged?

[medsecslave]

It was an overspill of a campsite on a patch of ground marked private.

[New Judge]

Just the sort of circumstances where the matter is not clear cut and must be ruled upon by the magistrates.

The defence in these circumstances is somewhat tricky. It depends upon who had access, whether such access was restricted and so on. Your husband would be well advised to seek the services of another solicitor before the next hearing and (more importantly) to take his or her advice.

[paraffin]

It is not unknown for Magistrates to insist that all parties be properly legally represented, thus granting an adjournment in order that such arrangements be made.

[Scarramouch]

i dont claim to have a great legal mind but i would say that ignoring a solicitors advice it a little foolish. The solicitor obviously feels he would compromise his case by speaking up. I would listen to her.

[medsecslave]

It's very complex not only the private land issue but my husband is accused of pranging another vehicle then being accused of being drunk. The police didn't arrive for some considerable time after by which time my husband had been drinking and he was breathalysed and charged on hearsay evidence. The solicitor herself admits their evidence is flawed but that he will be charged on the police evidence in any case. The arresting officer has now emigrated. I think the prosecution will make mincemeat of him as he's not that confident and can understand that he may well say something which will make matters worse. It's a real mess. Does the solicitor have to advise the court that she won't be there next week - what's the best thing for him to do?

[medsecslave]

Should he advise the Court now of the current situation or is his solicitor obliged to notify them that he is no longer represented... that's what I meant in my previous post.

[New Judge]

Magistrates cannot insist that all parties have legal representation, paraffin.

They can allow a defendant every opportunity to get legal advice and be represented if they believe that it would be in the interests of justice, but insisting is not within their powers.

The (ex) solicitor could contact the court in advance of the next hearing, but granting an adjournment in these circumstances is a judicial decision which can only be taken by the magistrates.

[paraffin]

NJ:

Yes, technically you are correct, however, and having had experience of this, they can make it extremely unappealing for someone to attempt to represent themselves.

It is always made in the individual's best interests and is clearly the common sense approach, which has been seen to be applied in Courts believe it or not.