Mr Justice Kearns refused Mr Coleman’s request to adjourn the strike-off application so he could get legal representation. In 2010, the SDT found him guilty of misconduct and applied to then-High Court president Mr Justice Nicholas Kearns to strike him off. He asked the SDT to take account of his co-operation in the three-year investigation into the complaints by the Law Society. He appealed for leniency based on the impact that an order for strike-off would have on him and his family. The SDT heard that Mr Coleman had admitted some of the conduct alleged but it was pleaded on his behalf that the only person who had suffered a loss in the offending transactions was him. It followed a lengthy legal history of the case brought by the Law Society over the 2004 misconduct. The High Court in 2020 ruled that he should be struck off the solicitors’ register. To sign up to the Daily Record Politics newsletter, click here.A solicitor who was struck off for professional misconduct over a land sale has lost an appeal against the decision.ĭaniel J Coleman, of Coleman & Company Solicitors, Main Street, Ballinrobe, Co Mayo, was found by a solicitors’ disciplinary tribunal (SDT) to have caused or allowed a “fictitious” contract regarding a 2004 land sale in Tuam, Co Galway, to come into existence to mislead a bank into advancing money to a development firm. Tory leadership candidates to face each other during live TV debatesĪnas Sarwar accused of 'sabotage' over SNP/Labour council deal that shut out the Tories How the Tory party leadership contest works as Boris Johnson resigns The reference is now before the Supreme Court, and the Court should be allowed to fulfil its function.” “However, whether the reference is accepted, how long it takes to determine and what judgment is arrived at are all matters for the Court to determine. “The UK Government’s repeated attempts to block democracy – which now seem to extend to an unwillingness to even make a substantive argument before the Supreme Court – serve only to demonstrate how little confidence it has in its case for the union. The Scottish Government fully intends to offer the Scottish people the choice of independence and has set out how it will do so. The move came after the Lord Advocate said she did not have the “necessary degree of confidence” that the referendum bill is within the powers of the Scottish Parliament.Ī spokesperson for the First Minister said: “People in Scotland have voted for a Parliament with a clear majority in favour of independence and with a mandate for an independence referendum. “The papers confirm that the Advocate General for Scotland will become a formal party to the case, and ask the Court to consider whether it should accept the Lord Advocate’s referral.” “However, following the Lord Advocate’s referral of the Scottish Government’s draft Scottish Independence Referendum Bill, the UK Government has today lodged its initial response with the Supreme Court. In a statement today, the UK Government confirmed it will take part in the process, but only to call for the referral to be rejected at the outset.Ī UK Government spokesperson said: “We have been clear that now is not the time to be discussing another independence referendum, when people across Scotland want both their governments to be working together on the issues that matter to them and their families.” Her response was for the Lord Advocate, who advises the Scottish Government, to ask the Supreme Court whether Holyrood has the power to legislate for a referendum. Outgoing Prime Minister Boris Johnson has consistently dismissed her call for a joint agreement on indyref2, leaving her plans in limbo. READ MORE: Lord Advocate lacks 'confidence' over Scottish independence referendum powers Ministers believe the best time for the Supreme Court to make a ruling on legislation is after a bill has been passed - not before it is considered by MSPs.īoth Governments are at loggerheads over the First Minister ’s plan for another referendum in October next year. The Tory Government has called for Nicola Sturgeon’s request for legal clarity on her referendum bill to be rejected.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |