Decision record
Jennifer Jacqueline Housen
Appeals and appellate references
- Appellate document — relationship to this matter unverified: Minett Lawrence v General Legal Council (Ex parte Kaon Northover [2022] JMCA Misc 1,(Paragraphs 108-114)
“Unverified” means the upstream page linked an appellate judgment but did not preserve enough context to prove that it was an appeal in this matter.
Allegation / charges
Suspended, Restitution Ordered | Disciplinary Committee decision delivered April 15, 2025. | Guilty of Professional Misconduct | Disciplinary Committee decision delivered April 25, 2024. View PDF DECISION ON SANCTION OF THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE GENERAL LEGAL COUNCIL COMPLAINT …
Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision
The Disciplinary Committee of the General Legal Council found Attorney Jennifer Housen guilty of professional misconduct for breaches of Canon I(b) and Canon IV(s) arising from her handling of a property sale where she acted for both vendor (Complainant) and purchaser. The property was transferred before the full purchase price was paid, and part remains outstanding, causing financial loss. No dishonesty was found (case involved negligence/conflict, not deceit). The Panel rejected a reprimand as too lenient and imposed a six-month suspension plus costs of JMD $400,000.
Duties found breached:
Aggravating factors:
- Placed herself in a position of potential conflict of interest by acting for both Vendor and Purchaser from the outset
- Prepared an Agreement allowing transfer of title to Purchaser before payment of balance purchase price without adequate protection for the Complainant
- Property transferred to Purchaser before Attorney received balance purchase price
- Continued to represent the Purchaser after a conflict arose
- Delayed paying sums received into client account to the Complainant
- Arranged periodic payments over a protracted period instead of paying immediately
- Complainant had to lodge a caveat and file a claim to recover the balance
Mitigating factors:
- Paid over sums received into client account to Complainant with interest from her own resources
- Assumed personal responsibility for the delayed payments
- Expressed regret and displayed contrition
- Previous disciplinary record considered
Duties engaged
Other decisions involving this respondent
Matched by respondent name — may include a different person with the same name.