Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:54:07.890Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Lawyer's Divided Loyalties: An Introductory Note

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2016

Shalev Ginossar
Get access

Extract

The three papers published hereafter were presented at an International Conference on the Ethics and Responsibilities of the Legal Profession held in Tel Aviv from 17–21 August 1980. As could be expected, the views expressed therein are not identical, but since they are all connected with the manner in which the nature and the function of the profession is conceived, it may be useful to outline the attitude of the law of Israel on the subject.

The Chamber of Advocates Law, enacted in 1961 to supersede the Advocates Ordinance, 1938, declares in sec. 54 that —

In carrying out his functions, an advocate shall serve the interests of his client loyally and devotedly and shall help the court to dispense justice.

The statute apparently places at the same level the lawyer's duties to his client and to the court: the order in which it enumerates them does not indicate any intention of priority—any more than in the Decalogue the respect due to one's father can be said to take preecdence over that to one's mother. The same two fundamental duties are mentioned, in reverse order, in the Rules of Professional Ethics made in 1966 by the National Council of the Chamber of Advocates with the approval of the Minister of Justice.

Type
Symposium on Legal Ethics
Information
Israel Law Review , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , January 1981 , pp. 1 - 4
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and The Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 15 L.S.I. 196.

2 This rule seems to be based on sec. 16(2) of the former Advocates Ordinance, 1938, which reads: “An advocate… must show the utmost respect to any Court before which he may appear, and submit promptly to its decisions…”

3 19 L.S.I. 231.

4 See supra n. 2.

5 19 L.S.I. 254.

5 19 L.S.I. 158.