Accountability

Disciplinary proceedings; Freedom of Expression and association; Role of Lawyers

Městský soud v Praze

Municipal Court Prague

11 Ad 14/2022-38

09/12/2022

N/A

N/A

N/A

Decision of the ECtHR from 30. 11. 2006, Veraart v Netherland, application no. 10807/04
Decision of the ECtHR from 22. 2. 1989, Barfod v Dennmark, application no. 11508/85

Freedom of Expression – attorney – limits – vulgar expression – disciplinary proceeding

Can an attorney acting as a company director be disciplined for sending a vulgar email to an insurance company?

N/A

N/A

§ 17 of the act no. 85/1996 Coll., on attorneys (zákon o advokacii)

The applicant was an attorney and also managing director of a company. In his emails to an insurance company employee in relation to his company's insurance claim, the claimant used vulgar and derogatory language, including phrases such as "stupid hen", "dumbass", "lying bitch", "you'll be pulling your fingers out of your ass" and "dumb idiots". As a result, he was disciplined by the Attorney Bar for breaching professional ethics by failing to uphold the dignity of the legal profession. As a result, he was fined approximately 3000 EUR.

The Municipal Court emphasised the crucial importance of maintaining the dignity of the legal profession, as set out in the law and the Code of Ethics for Attorneys. They are required to conduct themselves in a manner that upholds the respect and seriousness of their profession, not only in the practice of law, but also in their personal lives. Although the term 'dignity' is not explicitly defined in the legal texts, it includes behaviour that is honest, courteous and professional. The Court noted that lawyers occupy a special position in society because of their role in providing legal assistance, and that only a profession that is trusted and respected can effectively fulfil this role. Therefore, the responsibility to uphold the dignity of the profession is paramount and conduct that diminishes this respect, such as vulgar, aggressive or inappropriate language, is considered unacceptable.
Even in situations where a lawyer may be under stress or provoked, they are still expected to act in accordance with the high ethical standards of the profession. Attorneys must maintain a professional demeanour, whether in their direct legal work or in situations indirectly related to their role as legal professionals. In this case, the applicant used offensive and derogatory language in the emails, which not only violated ethical guidelines, but also reflected poorly on the legal profession as a whole. The applicant's defence that such language was used out of frustration or provocation was rejected, with the court stating that a lawyer should be able to express even strong or critical opinions in a respectful and civilised manner.
Ultimately, the court upheld the disciplinary action taken against the applicant, ruling that the use of vulgar and insulting language towards certain individuals constituted a serious breach of the lawyer's duty to uphold the dignity and honour of the legal profession. The Court concluded that the maintenance of this high standard of conduct is essential to the preservation of public confidence in the legal system and that any conduct which undermines it should result in appropriate disciplinary action.

N/A

N/A

The Municipal Court does not engage with foreign case law or case law of other national courts.

The Municipal Court cites some case law of the Supreme Administrative Court related to the professional conduct of attorneys.

The Municipal Court wanted to set out the basic rules on limiting lawyers' freedom of speech.

N/A

N/A

N/A

No

Yes

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Ondřej Kadlec, Šimon Chvojka, Masaryk University