Raphael Bishop

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

The respondent attorney was engaged to handle the sale of the deceased client's property (Lot 416 Willowdene). He delayed nearly a year before submitting documents for stamping, never met or properly communicated with his client, failed to respond to the executors' and purchasers' attorneys' numerous letters and calls, failed to complete the sale, and failed to account for monies received. He altered the date on the Agreement for Sale (from March 1993 to April 1994) to avoid stamp duty penalties. The Disciplinary Committee, applying the criminal standard of proof, found he knew he was falsifying the document and that this was reprehensible, dishonourable and a deliberate act to defraud the government of revenue and a deliberate misrepresentation (though falsification was not a specific charge). He was found guilty of misconduct under Canons IV(r), IV(s) and VII(ii)(b) and s.12(1) of the Legal Profession Act. He was ordered to pay a fine of J$150,000, costs on the scale, and interest at 18% on J$41,706 for the relevant period.

Duties found breached:

• No baseless or threatened misconduct report
• No conflict between current clients
• No taking unfair advantage
• Prompt accounting and return of money

Aggravating factors:

• Falsifying the date on the Agreement for Sale to avoid stamp duty penalties
• Deliberate act to defraud the government of revenue
• Deliberate misrepresentation where the vendor had already died
• Inordinate and inexcusable delay in completing the sale
• Failure to communicate with the client and the English solicitors despite persistent attempts to contact him
• Failure to account to the client/executors that funds had been returned