David Herlihy
Allegation / charges
In the matter of David Herlihy, solicitor, formerly practising as principal of David Herlihy, Solicitors, Lord Edward Street, Kilmallock, Co Limerick, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2011 [9286/DT90/15 and High Court record 2017/5SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) David Herlihy (respondent solicitor) On 25 February 2016, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of professional misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: 1) In respect of six matters, made a stamp duty return that he knew to be false, 2) On eight occasions, failed to apply moneys collected from one or more clients towards the discharge of stamp duty and/or registration fees, 3) Failed to take any or any adequate steps when he knew or ought to have known that documentation relating to a loan bore a purchase price in excess of that which appeared in the contract in respect of five matters, 4) Failed to comply, either adequately or at all, on one or more occasions, with the requirements of section 68(1) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 , and/or 5) Failed on one or more occasions to comply with the requirements of the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Act 2010 , and/or 6) Failed to comply adequately or at all with the directions of the committee made on 23 May 2013, and/or 7) Failed to attend or arrange to be represented at a meeting of the committee dated 26 June 2013, when required to do so, and/or 8) Failed to reply adequately to correspondence from the Society dated 30 April 2013. The tribunal ordered that this matter go forward to the High Court and, on 10 March 2017, the High Court ordered that: 1) The name of the respondent solicitor be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 2) The applicant be permitted to take up clients’ moneys and lodge same to a Law Society nominated account and to take possession of the books of account and ledger cards and accounting records of the respondent solicitor’s practice, 3) Pursuant to section 20(6) of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1960 (as amended by substitution by section 28 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994 ), the respondent lodge forthwith (or cause to be lodged), pursuant to the provisions of regulation 4(1) of the Solicitors (Accounts) Regulations 2001 (SI 421/2001), any client moneys subsequently received by him to the appropriate client account or client accounts, unless otherwise ordered by the court, 4) The respondent solicitor pay the sum of €5,000 as a contribution towards the whole of the costs of the applicant before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and pay the sum of €5,000 as a contribution towards the whole of the costs of the applicant before the High Court, with a stay on registration and execution for a period of 12 months from the date of the High Court order, 5) There be liberty to apply. The order of the High Court is under appeal to the Court of Appeal by the respondent solicitor.
Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found David Herlihy guilty of professional misconduct on eight grounds, including making stamp duty returns he knew to be false, failing to apply client moneys to stamp duty/registration fees, ignoring discrepancies in loan documentation, breaches of section 68(1) and anti-money-laundering requirements, and failing to cooperate with the Society. The matter went to the High Court, which on 10 March 2017 ordered him struck off the Roll of Solicitors, permitted the Society to take control of client moneys and records, and directed payment of €5,000 costs before the Tribunal and €5,000 before the High Court (with a 12-month stay). The order is under appeal to the Court of Appeal. No express finding of dishonesty was recorded in the text.
Duties found breached:
- No improper communication with the court
- No conflict between current clients
- Handle inadvertently received material
- No improper use of client money
- AML and crime-prevention compliance
⚠ figures not found verbatim in the source were dropped: ["unverified_costs_amount=10000", "extracted_from_register_summary"]
Duties engaged
Documents
No documents recorded.
Source: https://www.lawsociety.ie/Public/disciplinarysearch/