THE LAWYER PAID WITH HIS STATUS FOR EXCESSIVE GREED

In 2020, an agreement was concluded between the principal and the lawyer on the provision of legal services in the framework of criminal proceedings and in the recovery of damage caused to the principal. According to the contract, the lawyer was entitled to remuneration in the amount of 100,000 rubles. In addition, in case of recovery of the damage caused in favor of his principal, the lawyer had to receive 40% of the amount recovered. The civil claim for damages was satisfied by the court, and the lawyer's principal was to receive 1.9 million rubles.

As he writes Pravo.ru , from his ward, the lawyer received a power of attorney to receive a writ of execution, as well as the entire amount to be recovered. Upon presentation of this writ of execution to the bailiffs, the lawyer indicated his account for the transfer of the recovered amount. Seven months after the lawyer received the entire due amount, a little more than 328 thousand rubles were transferred to the account of his principal. A representative of the principal filed a complaint against an unscrupulous lawyer with the Main Department of the Ministry of Justice in Moscow, and also demanded that the bar association in which the lawyer worked transfer the remaining amount illegally appropriated by the lawyer to the principal's account.

After that , the lawyer performed the following actions: he deposited on behalf of his principal in the cashier of the bar association about 788 thousand rubles marked "for the recovery of damage caused by a criminal act" and on the basis of an agreement on the provision of legal assistance. Further, the lawyer demanded that his now "non-trustee" transfer 100 thousand rubles to his account and transferred one-fourth of the amount collected under the writ of execution to the latter's account.

However, the Ministry of Justice brought charges against the lawyer for violating lawyer ethics. The Council of the Moscow Chamber of Advocates and the Qualification Commission supported the prosecution. At the same time, the Chamber of Advocates stressed that the Ministry of Justice has no claims to the very fact of withholding the amount of its remuneration under the service agreement. This practice does not contradict the traditions of the Russian legal profession, which were formed in imperial times.

The lawyer insisted that there was nothing in his actions that would contradict the lawyer's or any other ethics, since he was not sure of the conscientious transfer of monetary remuneration by the principal in his favor.

The Council of the Chamber of Advocates judged as follows: the lawyer misled his principal regarding the result of the final proceedings. The latter repeatedly appealed to his representative for information about the proceedings and about the payment of the amount collected under the writ of execution. However, the lawyer repeatedly replied that the proper procedures were still not over. According to the Council, the lawyer had no moral or legal right to withhold disproportionately large sums of money in order to ensure his remuneration of 100 thousand rubles.

The lawyer was deprived of his status. He will be able to return it only after three years, if he can pass the qualification exams.