Home Maxims & Terms Canons of Professional Conduct and Etiquette of Advocate meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Canons of Professional Conduct and Etiquette of Advocate

Canons of Professional Conduct and Etiquette of Advocate legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2001 YLR 1152 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Canons of Professional Conduct and Etiquette of Advocate

Duties of an Advocates in Islamic society enlisted.

2001 CLC 1559 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Art. 199Service Tribunals Act (LXX of 1973), S.2-APenal Code (XLV of 1860), S.21Constitutional petitionMaintainabilityCivil servantEmployees of Sui Southern Gas Company Ltd.Status of

Sui Southern Gas Company is public limited and incorporated under the Companies Act, 1913, and is quoted on Stock Exchanges

Although the majority shares in the Company are held by the President of Pakistan, yet the same does not make the Company a department of Government of Pakistan

Insertion of S.2-A in Service Tribunals Act, 1973, does not in any way make employees of the Company civil servants or public functionaries to make them amenable to the Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court

Constitutional petition was not maintainable against the employees of Sui Southern Gas Company in circumstances.

2001 CLC 1559 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Canons of Professional Conduct and Etiquette of AdvocateDuty of Advocate towards Court and clientFailure to prepare brief properlyEffect

Advocate is an officer of Court and is concerned in the proper administration of justice and owes an overriding duty to the Court, to the standards of his profession and to the public, to ensure that it is achieved

Where Advocate has not prepared his brief properly and has not placed the relevant law before the Court, such counsel has failed in his duty by not maintaining the standards expected of an Advocate

Where counsel does not come to the Court ready with the facts and law on the legal propositions, such lapse on his part would show disrespect to the standards of the profession, duty to the Court in the administration of justice and negligence of his duty to client

Such counsel has not only committed breach of the Injunctions of Islam but has also committed breach of promise to his client.

2001 CLC 1312 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Canons of Professional Conduct and Etiquette of AdvocateDuty of AdvocatesAdvocates are officers of the Court and their duty to the Court has precedence over their duty to the clientDuty of counsel is to research the relevant law thoroughly and advise their clients honestly

When a counsel signs, files or submits to the Court any application it is assumed that the application is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay, that the legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law and practice

Where a counsel succumbs to temptation of money offered by a client and .takes up a brief without ascertaining true facts and researching the law such counsel would be deemed to be a party to vexatious claim and his duty to the Court would be subordinated to his client.

2001 PLC(CS) 760 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Canons of Professional Conduct and Etiquette of AdvocateDuty of Advocate towards Court and clientFailure to prepare brief properlyEffect

Advocate is an officer of Court, and is concerned in the proper administration of justice and owes an overriding duty to the Court, to the standards of his profession and to the public, to ensure that it is achieved

Where Advocate has not prepared his brief properly and has not placed the relevant law before the Court, such counsel has failed in his duty by not maintaining the standards expected of an Advocate

Where counsel does not come to the Court ready with the facts and law on the legal propositions, such lapse on his part would show disrespect to the standards of the profession, duty to the Court in the administration of justice and negligence of his duty to client

Such counsel has not only committed breach of the Injunctions of Islam but has also committed breach of promise to his client.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Canons of Professional Conduct and Etiquette of Advocate", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/14202

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Canons of Professional Conduct and Etiquette of Advocate"

CLC 1999
Intra‑Court Appeal No.63 of 1998, decided on 1st April, 1998.

1999 C L C 105

MUHAMMAD LATIF‑‑‑Appellant Versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER and others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
SCMR 1984
N/A

1984 S C M R 1555

Malik NAWAB ALI BHATTI‑‑Petitioner Versus QAISER ALI and another‑‑Respondents

Court: High Court
YLR 2000
Judicial Miscellaneous Application No.53 of 1996, decided on 1st November, 1999.

2000 Y L R 1102

MUHAMMAD AHSAN and 5 others‑‑‑Applicants Versus ALTAF HUSSAIN and 7 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Karachi
SCMR 2016
Civil Misc. Application No.3704 of 2015 in CMA No.4341 of 2014 in CMA No.3854 of 2014 in Suo Motu Case No.3 of 2009, Civil Misc. Application No.3708 of 2015 in Civil Review Petition No.Nil/15 in CMA No.4341/14 in CMA No.3854/14 in SMC No.3/09 and Civil Misc. Application No. 3853 of 2015 in Civil Review Petition No.Nil/15 in CMA No.4341/14 in CMA No.3854/14 in SMC No.3/09 decided on 3rd September, 2015.

2016 S C M R 141

Syed ALI ZAFAR, ADVOCATE BAHRIA TOWN (PVT.) LTD. — Applicant Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
MLD 2001
Execution Application No.56 of 1999, decided on 15th September, 2000.

2001 M L D 153

ABDUL HAMEED‑‑‑Decree‑Holder Versus Messrs PANHWAR CONSTRUCTION CO. and others‑‑‑Judgment‑Debtors

Court: Karachi
MLD 1998
1998-April-25

1998 M L D 1389

SAMIR AHSAN ULLAH and another — Complainants Versus J.V. GARDNER, ADVOCATE — Respondent

Court: Pakistan Bar Council
PCRLJ 1992
1992-April-20

1992 P Cr

HABIBUR REHMAN — Applicant/Complainant Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Court: Karachi
SCMR 1992
Criminal Appeal No.24-K of 1992, decided on 5th May, 1992.

1992 S C M R 1469

MIR HASAN — Petitioner Versus HABIBUR REHMAN and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
CLC 2018
2017-November-24

2018 C L C 664

ABRAR HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus VIITH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, SOUTH KARACHI and 13 others — Respondents

Court: Sindh
PLD 2001
2000-September-7

P L D 2001 Karachi 20

MUHAMMAD DAWOOD KHAN — Decree-Holder Versus ELYAS AMEEN and others — Judgment-Debtors

Court: High Court