Daniel v. Chandradeva – sllr 1994 volume 2 page 001

In the case between Daniel (Plaintiff) and Chandradeva (Respondent/Registered Attorney), the court addressed the issue of professional misconduct by an attorney involving the breach of duty towards a client, repeated failure to appear in court, and misappropriation of client funds. The court held that the conduct of the attorney, including unauthorized alteration of proxy, deceitful actions regarding client finances, and neglect of court duties, constituted professional misconduct, rendering the attorney unfit to practice. The principle reaffirmed was that attorneys owe an unwavering duty to both court and client, transcending mere contractual obligations. This decision relied significantly on Rules 15, 16, and 28 of the Supreme Court (Conduct of and Etiquette for Attorneys‑at‑Law) Rules o