A lawyer has been ordered to step aside and to hand over his former client’s files – despite an unresolved legal fee dispute – after the Royal Court ruled that access to justice must not be obstructed by arguments over payment.

The Royal Court was asked to intervene after Advocate Ian Jones declined to withdraw from the case involving Garry Yuri Itkin, his former client, and Golden Sphinx Limited or hand over Mr Itkin’s documents unless outstanding legal fees were paid.

A stand-off over fees

Mr Itkin, who represented himself, disputed the fees and said the stand-off was preventing him from instructing new lawyers and advancing urgent appeal proceedings.

In a judgment handed down on 8 January, Commissioner Sir William Bailhache said that while lawyers have a right to be paid, that right cannot override the interests of justice.

“In my judgment, the need to achieve justice in the proceedings before the court is the overriding consideration,” he wrote.

The need to achieve justice in the proceedings before the court is the overriding consideration

Commissioner Sir William Bailhache

“The court must ensure that a litigant has access to justice and a fair hearing under the Human Rights (Jersey) Law 2000, and should not permit, as it were, the tail to wag the dog by putting the rights of the lawyer in that litigation to trump the rights of the litigant.”

The Commissioner accepted that Advocate Jones had acted in good faith and faced real difficulty in recovering fees from a client outside the island.

“Inconvenient, perhaps difficult” for lawyer to obtain redress

“In some ways, I accept his is a difficult situation,” he wrote. “He has acted in good faith for a client for some time. That client is a person outside the jurisdiction against whom he will find it inconvenient, perhaps difficult, to obtain redress for the outstanding fee.”

However, Sir William concluded that Mr Itkin had not acted unreasonably in terminating the retainer, and that there was no evidence he was wilfully refusing to pay despite having the means to do so.

The Commissioner also noted the wider consequences of the impasse, including the risk that an appeal might be delayed.

“The need for urgency in that respect is a material factor in my decision on this application,” said Sir William.

£10,000 security payment ordered

As a compromise, the court ordered Mr Itkin to pay £10,000 into a Jersey account as security, pending resolution of the fee dispute through appropriate channels.

The payment, the court stressed, “does not prejudge the amount which might be due”.

Subject to that payment, Advocate Jones must come off the record once a new advocate is appointed and must hand over Mr Itkin’s papers and files to his new lawyer.

Sir William concluded: “The advocate/client dispute takes second place to the need to achieve justice in the main proceedings.”