EXAMINATION OF NEGLIGENCE IN PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT AND ITS DEFENCES IN NIGERIA

Abstract

Negligence as a tortious liability occurs when a person exercising or professing to exercise a special skill fails to adhere to the requite standard of care and skill expectant from him. In law, professional negligence is provided for under the rules of professional conduct and the Legal Practitioners Act. Both provides that professional negligence occurs when there is a breach or misconduct arising from the attitude of the legal practitioner while representing his client in court. It is necessary to point out that the relationship between a legal practitioner and his client is that built on trust or fiduciary and also contractual. The law of contract clearly points out that for there to be a contractual relationship between two people, there must be an act of giving and an act of receiving. This is to say that once the legal practitioner accepts the brief of a client to represent him and the necessary legal fees has been paid to him, he owes the client the onerous duty of representing him diligently. This paper dealt with three major ingredients of proving negligence to include duty of care, breach of duty of care, causation and subsequent loss from the conduct, action and inaction of the legal practitioner in handling the claimants brief. This paper also pointed out the ratio for assessment to that of a reasonable and competent legal practitioner like the tortfessor. However, this paper looked into section 9 subsection 2 of the Legal Practitioners Act that limits the liability of a lawyer for pro bono services. The issue then was whether because a legal practitioner handles a matter pro bono will make him jeopardize the case. My stand is that a man shall do that which he professes to do and do it definitely well irrespective of whether he was paid or not. In conclusion, this paper looked into the reliefs available to the claimant but frowned at the fact that most clients do not or are reluctant to bring a legal action against legal practitioner who mishandled their brief owing to their belief that such suit will not see the light of the day nor that the lawyer he will engage will be biased because his colleagues is involved. Finally, this paper proffered solution to bridge the gap that exists between the legal practitioner and his client through sensitizing the public on their right and privileges.