Akin Adaramaja v General Legal Council

• Jurisdiction: Jamaica
• Court: Court of Appeal (Jamaica)
• Judge: Lawrence-Beswick JA (Ag)
• Judgment Date: 20 December 2013
• Neutral Citation: JM 2013 CA 135
• Docket Number: MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO 4/2013 APPLICATION NO 150/2013
• Date: 20 December 2013

[2013] JMCA App 38

JAMAICA

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO 4/2013

APPLICATION NO 150/2013

Between

Akin Adaramaja

Applicant

and

The General Legal Council

Respondent

Rudolph Francis instructed by Forsythe and Forsythe for the applicant

Mrs Sandra Minott-Phillips QC and Mrs Alexis Robinson instructed by Myers Fletcher and Gordon for the respondent

LEGAL PROFESSION - Disciplinary proceedings - Applicant struck off the roll of attorneys-at-law - Order for restitution - Notice of appeal - Applicant failed to turn over net proceeds of sale to client - Whether attorney has a very good arguable case - Whether orders manifestly harsh and excessive - Whether a stay should be granted - Court of Appeal Rules. Rule 2.11- Application for stay of execution

IN CHAMBERS

Lawrence-Beswick JA (Ag)

1 On 2 November 2013, the Disciplinary Committee of the General Legal Council ordered that the name of Mr Akin Adaramaja, an attorney-at-law, be struck off the roll of attorneys-at-law entitled to practise in Jamaica and also that he make restitution of US$47,066.32 and US$1,732.93 with interest to Ms Elaine Francis, the complainant in this matter.

2 On 14 November 2013, Mr Adaramaja filed a notice of appeal challenging that decision and by this application, also filed on that day, seeks a stay of execution of the orders of the committee.

Background

3 Mr Adaramaja represented Ms Elaine Francis where she was the defendant in an action brought against her by her niece and nephew to enforce a contract to sell her house to them. Ms Francis was unsuccessful in her defence and also in her appeal of the judgment in that suit.

4 The sale of the property was therefore concluded and the proceeds of the sale were sent to Mr Adaramaja. However, he did not give any of the proceeds to Ms Francis. He testified before the committee that Ms Francis had instructed him to deal only with her or with a named nephew, who had subsequently died, and he was therefore waiting for her to come herself to settle her account. Ms Francis is 82 years old and lives abroad.

5 Ms Francis' niece, Ms Jacqueline Jervis, acting under a power of attorney from Ms Francis, contacted Mr Adaramaja to settle the account. However, he did not release any funds to her or to Ms Francis. The evidence from Mr Adaramaja was that he did not wish to make the payment to Ms Jervis in view of his initial instructions from Ms Francis to deal with her alone or the nephew, who had since died.

6 Ms Jervis testified before the committee that after some conversations, Mr Adaramaja admitted to her that he had taken the money because his secretary had stolen $6,000,000.00 from him and he was having financial problems. He agreed to repay the sum of J$3,906,505.00 owed to Ms Francis, along with lost interest, in three installments, into an account in a New York bank. However, he made no payment and on 15 February 2013 Ms Jervis, by virtue of the power of attorney, filed a complaint at the General Legal Council on behalf of Ms Francis.

7 The hearing of the complaint before the Disciplinary Committee was on 12 October 2013. Both Ms Francis and Ms Jervis attended, as well as the applicant. The order made was:

‘Having regard to the foregoing, it is hereby ordered that:

• (1) Pursuant to s.12(4)(a) of the Legal Profession Act , the name of the Respondent, Akin Adaramaja is struck off the Roll of Attorneys-at-law entitled to practice [sic] in the Island of Jamaica.

• (2) Pursuant to s.12(4)(g) [sic] of the Legal Profession Act , by way of restitution the Respondent, Akin Adaramaja is [to] pay to the Complainant the sums of US$47,066.32 and US$1,732.93 together with interest accruing on the sum of US$47,066.32 at the rate of 3 per centum per annum from the 9 ^th December 2009 to the date of payment and interest accruing on the sum of US$1,732.93 at the rate of 3 per centum per annum from the 12 ^th October 2013 to the date of payment. The aforesaid sums inclusive of interest may be paid in Jamaican Dollars computed at the Bank of Jamaica's weighted average rate for selling United States Dollars in exchange for Jamaican Dollars prevailing on the date of payment.

• (3) The Respondent, Akin Adaramaja is also to pay costs to the Complainant in the sum of J$40,000.00.’

Submissions

8 Counsel submitted on behalf of Mr Adaramaja that the stay of execution of the decision should be granted because the General Legal Council failed to properly consider all the material. It therefore came to an erroneous conclusion and had also erred in law. The submission continued that the committee had failed to consider a fundamental exhibit which would exonerate the applicant and that he has a ‘very good arguable case’ because there is ‘strong evidence’ to show that he could not have misled Ms Francis. Further, the orders were ‘manifestly harsh and excessive’.

9 Counsel also argued that unless the execution of the orders is stayed, Mr Adaramaja would face ‘absolute professional and financial ruin, loss of reputation, distress, loss and damages and would face other real and genuine hardship’. The damage to the applicant would be too great to quantify if the stay were not granted.

10 Further, counsel submitted that there are special circumstances, as contemplated in Barker v Lavery (1885) 14 QBD 769, which should cause the applicant to get a stay of execution. These circumstances are that he has ongoing matters in the various courts of Jamaica and his clients would be...