A TAX consultant misled his wife's brother into believing he was a solicitor and then fraudulently converted some of his brother-in-law's funds to his own use, a judge held in the Circuit Civil Court in Dublin yesterday.
Judge Esmonde Smyth said he was satisfied Mr John McGrattan, of Grattan Street, Dublin, and Elm Mount, Stillorgan Grove, Dublin, was never a solicitor and was not entitled to describe himself as such.
He told Mr Aedan McGovern SC, for Mr John Wolfe and his son, Sean, of Seafield Court, Bissett Strand, Malahide, that his clients were entitled to the return of the money, £3,146, and £1,500 damages in compensation for the disruption of their affairs and lives. Judge Smyth made the decree against Mr McGrattan and his wife, Ms Gabrielle Wolfe, a solicitor.
When the court heard Mr McGrattan was unable to attend court because he was on business in England, a claim by him for fees against John and Sean Wolfe was dismissed. Judge Smyth said he would hear Mr Wolfe's counter-claim.
When Mr McGrattan's wife, representing him in the case but also a party in the action, interjected while Mr John Wolfe was giving evidence, Judge Smyth briefly adjourned for talks with counsel.
On resumption he said Ms Wolfe had interjected in a totally inappropriate and improper fashion and asked for an explanation in open court.
He felt it was entirely wrong she, as a party in the case, should be acting as instructing solicitor. He felt she should disengage herself from the case.
Her counsel explained that another solicitor had previously acted in the case and she had taken over the file only this year. There was no rule of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland precluding her from doing so.
When Ms Wolfe apologised for having interjected during her brother's evidence, Judge Smyth said she and her counsel could remain in court but he would not regard her as being in the position she would like to be in.
Having heard the undisputed evidence on behalf of the Wolfes, Judge Smyth said the case arose originally over an action by Mr McGrattan and Ms Wolfe for just under £5,000 for work done and services rendered.
He said Mr Wolfe and his son had placed their trust in Mr McGrattan, who had claimed to be a solicitor which he was not. He had told them he would look after their tax affairs which he clearly had not done.
"I am satisfied he fraudulently converted some of the money to his own use and benefit and that in the course of doing so he forged a letter to give the impression it had been sent by the Revenue when it was nothing of the sort." He was referring the papers in the case to the DPP.
He said he was not happy with the plaintiffs conduct of the case. Even if Ms Wolfe was technically entitled to appear for her husband he felt, when the conflict of interest became apparent, as it did, she would have had no further role in the case.