Verdict noted that routine plea that counsel is engaged before a superior Court cannot
ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court has expressed deep concern over the growing culture of unwarranted adjournments that continues to plague the administration of civil justice.
“Members of the Bar undoubtedly shoulder demanding professional commitments and frequently appear before multiple fora on the same day. Nevertheless, every advocate owes an overriding duty to the client, to the Court and to the administration of justice. Once a counsel accepts a brief, it is incumbent upon him to ensure that the matter is properly attended to, particularly where important proceedings, such as recording of evidence, are scheduled,” a 10-page judgement authored by Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan said while hearing a civil case.
The verdict noted that the routine plea that the counsel is engaged before a superior Court cannot, by itself, constitute sufficient cause.
“Superior Courts ordinarily conclude substantial judicial work well before the close of the working day, leaving adequate time for counsel to honour commitments undertaken before subordinate Courts. Trial Courts ordinarily function throughout the working day, and, in the ordinary course, there exists sufficient opportunity for counsel to attend proceedings before subordinate Courts after conclusion of matters in the superior Courts,” it said.
“More fundamentally, an advocate should accept only such number of briefs as can reasonably be discharged with competence, diligence and fidelity to the client’s cause. Professional overcommitment cannot be permitted to become a justification for repeated disruption of judicial proceedings,” it added.
A division bench of the Supreme Court led by Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan noted that the “unfortunate consequence” of this practice is seldom borne by the defaulting advocate.
