law societies v. the public documentation part one

Do they have the expertise, though?

You don’t say:

You don’t say redux:

No shit, Sherlock.

“public confidence” means not using scare quotes to dismiss a member of the public’s complaints against rogue lawyers going rogue roguely:

How about following the Law Society legislative act, rules and process as though it was set in stone?

Policies are designed with ‘don’t mess this up’ in mind.

A statutory decision-maker has to aim to be correct, not merely reasonable:

Reasonableness is defined as:

How could “we asked the Respondent to explain your complaint to us. They told us it had no merit, so we dismissed it” holds up to any reasonableness test?

Without reasonableness, there is no valid decision-making process:

Involving the Respondent in the initial assessment while ignoring its process obligation to contact the complainant for more support violated the LSBC’s procedure:

“Find their source in the actual grant of authority” is a fancy-schmancy way of saying, “don’t get caught talking out of your ass”:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s