For the Public
Common Concerns
Quality of Service
Chapter II of the Code
of Professional
Conduct confirms that the lawyer owes the client a duty to
be competent to perform any legal services undertaken
on the client's behalf. The lawyer should be conscientious,
diligent and efficient in the provision of services to the client.
The client is entitled to assume that the lawyer has the ability
and capacity to deal adequately with any legal matters undertaken
on the client's behalf.
The Code sets out an illustrative but not
exhaustive list of examples where the lawyer's conduct does not
meet the quality of service required by the Rule:
(a) failure to keep the client
reasonably informed;
(b) failure to answer reasonable
requests from the client for information;
(c) unexplained failure to respond
to the client's telephone calls;
(d) failure to keep appointments
with clients without explanation or apology;
(e) informing the client that
something will happen or that some step will be taken by a certain
date, then letting the date pass without follow-up information or
explanation;
(f) failure to answer within a
reasonable time a communication that requires a reply;
(g) doing the work in hand but doing
it so belatedly that its value to the client is diminished or
lost;
(h) slipshod work, such as mistakes
or omissions in statements or documents prepared on behalf of the
client;
(i) failure to maintain office staff
and facilities adequate to the lawyer's practice;
(j) failure to inform the client of
proposals of settlement, or to explain them properly;
(k) withholding information from the
client or misleading the client about the position of a matter in
order to cover up the fact of neglect or mistakes;
(l) failure to make a prompt and
complete report when the work is finished or, if a final report
cannot be made, failure to make an interim report where one might
reasonably be expected;
(m) self-induced disability, for
example from the use of intoxicants or drugs, which interferes with
or prejudices the lawyer's services to the client;
(n) failure to maintain an adequate
limitation reminder or tickler system to ensure an effective
follow-up procedure with respect to the lawyer's files.
A mistake, error or omission by a lawyer would not
automatically constitute a failure to maintain the standard for
'quality of service' set by the Code of Professional Conduct and
result in review of the lawyer's conduct. However, evidence of
gross neglect in a particular matter or a pattern of dilatory
practice, neglect and/or mistakes in several different matters may
be evidence of such a failure. Evidence of dishonesty or bad faith
may also escalate errors, omissions and/or negligence to
misconduct. It is possible that damages may be awarded in a
separate action for negligence and disciplinary sanctions may
result from a pattern of incompetent or dilatory practice or bad
faith and misconduct although this is not common.