§ Mr. NEWBOLDasked the Attorney-General whether he is aware that counsel's fees are treated as an honorarium 1647W and are not recoverable by the person who has paid them; that there are occasions when counsel have been paid their fees but do not attend the case for which the fee has been paid; that the litigant cannot bring any action for negligence nor for the return of the fees; and whether he will introduce legislation to put an end to this immunity of counsel?
§ The ATTORNEY-GENERALCounsel's fees are in law an honorarium, and are not recoverable from the client. The occasions when counsel have neither attended a case nor provided a substitute must be very exceptional, and I do not think that any counsel would insist on retaining his fee in such circumstances. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.
§ Mr. NEWBOLDasked the Attorney-General whether, seeing that there is no means of discussing the conduct of judges on the bench except by means of an address to His Majesty praying for the removal of the judge, and that litigants have no remedy against irregular conduct by judge or counsel in the course of judicial proceedings, he will set up a committee consisting of Members of this House and of judicial members of the Privy Council before which litigants with causes of complaint against judges or counsel can lay their cases?
§ The ATTORNEY-GENERALNo, Sir.
§ Mr. NEWBOLDasked the Attorney-General whether he is aware that the private litigant has no right of action against counsel for negligence or fraud in carrying out their professional duties, and that solicitors, architects, engineers, doctors, and other professional men are liable to their clients for negligence or fraud in the execution of their professional duties; and whether he will take steps to introduce legislation withdrawing the privileges of members of the bar so far as such privileges render them immune from actions for negligence or fraud?
§ The ATTORNEY-GENERALI am not aware, and it is not the fact, that counsel are immune from actions for fraud. It is the fact that counsel are not liable to be sued for negligence, just as they are not entitled to sue for their fees. I do not think that an alteration of the law in this respect would be to the advantage either of clients or of the bar.