A recent judgment from the High Court Division has shed light on the issue of misusing the “Lawyer’s Certificate” and issued specific directions to rectify this concerning trend.
Before delving into the issue, let’s clarify what “Lawyer’s Certificate” or “Advocate Certificate” means in the context. Whenever a lawyer obtains a prohibitory order from the Court in his/her favour, the official certified copies of the same take a few days (even weeks, if unlucky) to be finalized and dispatched in due course. Meanwhile, there might be some urgency to protect the subject matter of the suit, and every hour could be important. In such a scenario, the concerned Advocate issues a letter on his/her official letterhead, notifying that a certain order has been passed by the court on a specific case. These letters are known as lawyer’s or advocates’ Certificates, and the Apex Court of the country has recognized these letters to be an authentic representation of the court’s order vide the judgment reported in 44 DLR (AD) 219.
In a recent judgment (Rowshan Sheikh and another vs. The State and another, 76 DLR (2024) 1, delivered on June 1, 2023), the High Court Division lamented how a number of Advocates are misusing this tool to delay, mislead, or even defraud the subordinate courts by providing vague or misrepresenting information. It has been found to be used as a ploy to delay the proceedings and/or buy some time for the client.
The judgment, authored by Mr. Justice Farid Ahmed, cited a number of examples of this malpractice and termed it “setting up a shadow high court”. The Court issued certain directions to rectify the situation in paragraph 14 of the judgment, which is reproduced below:
“Now for long time this practice have been going on. For interest of early disposal and early hearing not to stay any proceeding civil or criminal without specific highest court’s order. The subordinate judiciary is directed not to entertain any Advocate certificate without containing any specific stay order of the High Court, and stay order of the Apex Court nothing else. We feel above noted circumstance i.e. issuance of Advocate certificate by violating the judgment of the Hon’ble Appellate Division as noted herein above the litigant people of this country are blaming the court that court is not administering justice in proper time. Issuing Advocate certificate without containing specific stay order is one of the reasons for creating backlog of eases. The circumstance is prevailing after delivery of judgment reported in 44 D.L.R. (AD) 219. It should not be continued in judicial arena. We feel that if any learned Advocate issues any certificate conveying prohibitory order, the party who is represented by such certificate issuing Advocate shall submit a certified copy of such prohibitory order to the concerned court below and validly of such advocate certificate shall not be in force after expiration of 30(thirty) days. For greater interest of the litigant people and for early hearing of the cases pending before the subordinate courts Registrar of this Court is directed to issue a circular in the light of judgment of the Hon’ble Appellate Division as well as the judgment of this Court. At the same time learned Advocates are debarred to issue any Advocate certificate before signing of prohibitory order of the Court.”
As such, a summary of the direction of the Hon’ble High Court Division is as follows:
- The subordinate judiciary is directed not to entertain any Advocate certificate without containing any specific stay order of the High Court or the Apex Court.
- If any learned Advocate issues any certificate conveying a prohibitory order, then a certified copy of such prohibitory order shall have to be submitted to the concerned court below, and such advocate certificate shall not be in force after the expiration of 30 (Thirty) days.
- Learned Advocates are debarred from issuing any Advocate certificate before signing of the prohibitory order by the Court.
This is indeed a timely decision to regulate unfair practices by a certain number of advocates in the Country. It is also unfortunate to learn about these practices, as this may trigger a sense of distrust between the advocates and the judges of the subordinate judiciary and overall diminish the trust and respect placed by the public in this noble profession.
Hope good senses will prevail !
Disclaimer: This brief is for general awareness and academic purposes only, and it does not, and is not intended to, constitute or to be construed as legal advice. You are advised to obtain advice from an Advocate with respect to any particular legal matter.