Advertisement

The case for and against extending cab rank rule

Reading Time:4 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
0

IS it fair to criticise the solicitors who declined to act for Messrs Martin Lee and Szeto Wah in their libel suit against Mr Simon Li? In Hong Kong, the rules of professional ethics governing the question of whether a lawyer may legitimately refuse to provide legal services to a client who seeks his or her assistance is the same as in England.

There are two different rules in this regard, one for barristers and the other for solicitors.

The former states: ''A practising barrister is bound to accept any brief to appear before a court in the field in which he professes to practise at his usual fee having regard to the type, nature, length and difficulty of the case. Special circumstances such as a conflict of interest or the possession of relevant and confidential information may justify his refusal to accept a particular brief.'' This is known as the ''cab rank rule''. It also applies to barristers in England and Australia and is based on the idea that a necessary condition for the rule of law is that no person will be deprived of the right to legal representation.

HOWEVER, as regards solicitors, the English rule - which is generally assumed to be applicable in Hong Kong - is that: ''A solicitor is generally free to decide whether to accept instructions from any particular client'' (emphasis supplied), except that a refusal to act must not be based upon the race, colour, ethnic or national anti-discrimination.

In other words, solicitors in Hong Kong and England are not bound by any cab rank principle.

Those who recently declined to act for Messrs Lee and Szeto have not violated any rules of professional conduct and are not liable to any disciplinary sanctions.

Advertisement