Solicitor in overcharging case challenges €650,000 cut to fees

A SOLICITOR found to have overcharged a client by more than €650,000 has asked a High Court judge to review a decision to cut his fees.

Wicklow-based Joe Buckley has claimed the Taxing Master, a quasi-judicial official who decides on disputes over legal fees, was wrong to slash 10 bills he charged to a client in connection with the sale of land and other matters.

Some of the bills involved “blatant and obvious” overcharging, according to a determination made by Taxing Master Declan O’Neill.

But Mr Buckley denies this and is seeking to have all of the decisions reversed, alleging various errors by Mr O’Neill.

Representing himself in the High Court yesterday, Mr Buckley, whose practice is at St Ives, Seapoint, Bray, outlined a series of deductions made by the Taxing Master after a former client, publican Denis Doyle, challenged a number of his bills.

The disputed bills in the case relate to work dating back to 1998 when Mr Doyle successfully opposed injunction proceedings brought by Wicklow County Council in relation to the operation of a landfill on land he owned.

Mr Buckley (right) also represented Mr Doyle in “protracted and fraught” negotiations in relation to compulsory purchase or- ders for land near the N11 in Co Wicklow, and some other matters in subsequent years.

In one instance, the Taxing Master cut a bill for professional fees sought in connection with the sale of lands in Delgany from €344,733 to just €70,000.

A different bill, for a sum of €92,450, was reduced to just €40,200.

A further bill for €125,000 was reduced to €72,500.

Mr Doyle paid a number of bills in 2006 after receiving the proceeds of land sales.

However, a dispute later arose between the him and his former solicitor over the size of some of the bills.

The disagreement has been rumbling along for the past seven years.

Various aspects of it have already been before the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Taxing Master.

The Taxing Master found Mr Buckley had charged Mr Doyle five times the norm in connection with the sale of family lands and 50pc higher than the norm in connection with another land transaction.

Yesterday, Mr Buckley told Mr Justice Donald Binchy that the Taxing Master could not have properly assessed some of the work done by him as the relevant files had been destroyed.

In another instance, he criticised the methodology used by the Taxing Master in arriving at a decision to cut a bill by more than 50pc.

He also claimed Mr Doyle agreed to pay a number of bills submitted and argued that a client’s signature attached to payment of a bill constituted an agreement in writing.

He said rules governing the taxation of legal costs entitled him to the “benefit of the doubt”.

The solicitor also claimed the Taxing Master would not let him open an affidavit explaining how he had arrived at the sum charged in another bill, which ended up being significantly cut.

The Taxing Master is standing over his determination but is not actively involved in the case. Mr Doyle, represented by Paul Anthony McDermott SC, is opposing any review of the Taxing Master’s decision.

The case continues.