9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Right of audience in court for an agent with a power of attorney. 2. Entitlement of notice to the agent if principal wants to appear personally or appoint an advocate. 3. Whether a power of attorney agent can engage in legal activities as a solicitor or attorney. Analysis: Issue 1: The judgment clarifies that a recognized agent with a power of attorney does not have the right to plead in court on behalf of the principal. This was established through precedents and legal provisions, emphasizing that the power to plead is restricted to qualified legal practitioners as per the High Court's rules and regulations. Issue 2: The court rejected the agent's claim to notice if the principal chooses to appear personally or appoint another advocate. The judgment highlighted the distinction between a power of attorney agent and a legal practitioner holding a vakalat, emphasizing that the former does not have the same rights and privileges in court proceedings. Issue 3: The judgment addressed the agent's assertion that he can engage in solicitor or attorney activities under the power of attorney. It was firmly established that such actions would constitute practicing law, which is reserved for qualified legal professionals. The court emphasized that even one isolated instance of carrying out legal activities without proper qualifications could be considered as unauthorized practice and subject to legal consequences. Overall, the judgment underscored the importance of upholding legal qualifications, rules of professional conduct, and disciplinary control within the legal profession. It highlighted the potential risks and ethical concerns associated with allowing unqualified individuals to perform legal tasks, emphasizing the need to maintain the integrity and standards of the legal profession.
|
