August 1, 2005 LAWS Regular News Pursuant to Standing Board Policy 1.60, the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar hereby publishes this notice of intent to consider or take final action at its August 26 meeting on the following items. These matters are additionally governed by Rule 1-12.1, Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, where applicable. Most amendments to the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar that are finally acted upon by the board must still be formally presented to the Supreme Court of Florida, with further notice and opportunity to be heard, before they are officially approved and become effective. To receive a full copy of the text of any of these proposed amendments call (850)561-5751 — reference any requested proposal by its title or item number and date of this publication. RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR Chapter 2 Bylaws of The Florida Bar Subchapter 2-7 Sections 1. Bylaw 2-7.3 Creation of Sections and Divisions Summary: Changes the name of the “Out-Of-State Practitioners Division” to the “Out-Of-State Division.” Chapter 3 Rules of Discipline Subchapter 3-6 Employment of Certain Attorneys or Former Attorneys 2. Rule 3-6.1 General Summary: Throughout entire rule, clarifies the limitations imposed on suspended, disbarred, or disciplinary resigned attorneys when they are employed by lawyers and law firms. Subchapter 3-7 Procedures 3. Rule 3-7.2 Procedures Upon Criminal or Professional Misconduct; Discipline Upon Determination or Judgment of Guilt of Criminal Misconduct Summary: Substantial revision of existing rule: within subdivision (a), expands definition of “determination of guilt’; within subdivision (b), extends the conclusive proof of guilt provisions regarding felony cases to all criminal cases; within subdivision (c), requires a member of the bar who is arrested on felony charges to give notice of such arrest to the executive director within 10 instead of 30 days; within subdivisions (c) – (e), provides notice requirements for members, court clerks, and state attorneys regarding institution of felony charges against the member, and regarding determination or judgment of guilt of any crimes; within newly proposed subdivision (f) – current (e) – streamlines and conforms text to proposed amendments elsewhere; within newly proposed subdivision (g) – current (f) – deletes subdivisions (2) & (3) and adds that a petition to modify or terminate suspension shall not stay any suspension under this rule; deletes current subdivision (g); within newly proposed subdivision (h), adds new provisions for appointment of referee upon entry of a suspension order, and includes procedures and timelines for separate hearings on petitions to modify or terminate and petitions on sanctions; within newly proposed subdivision (i) – portions of current (h) and all of current (i) are deleted – revises current (h)(3) to clarify that a suspension remains in effect during any appeal of a criminal conviction; within newly proposed subdivision (j), revises existing provisions regarding expunction to include any disciplinary action under this rule, and to encompass criminal matters disposed by dismissal as well as acquittal; within newly proposed subdivision (k), adds that a respondent may waive the time requirements of this rule by written request and judicial approval; revises affected subdivision titles and other entries appropriately. Chapter 4 Rules of Professional Conduct Subchapter 4-1 Client-Lawyer Relationship 4. Rule 4-1.8 Conflict of Interest: Prohibited and Other Transactions Summary: Within subdivision (h), adds new language that would permit a lawyer – upon request of a potential client – to contract with the client to resolve through mandatory arbitration any malpractice claim by the client against the lawyer that may arise; sets forth required language for any such attorney-client agreement; proposed as companion to suggested amendments creating new rule 4-1.5(i). Subchapter 4-6 Public Service 5. Rule 4-6.5 Voluntary Pro Bono Plan Summary: Consistent with proposed changes in rule 2-7.3, changes the name of the Out-of-State Practitioners Division to the Out-of-State Division. Chapter 6 Legal Specialization and Education Programs Subchapter 6-1 Generally 6. Rule 6-1.2 Public Notice Summary: Consistent with court opinions and Bar committee determinations, updates the explanation of board certification for public notices in telephone directory yellow pages. Subchapter 6-22 Standards for Certification of a Board Certified Antitrust and Trade Regulation Lawyer 7. Rule 6-22.4 Recertification Summary: Within subdivision (a), adds “or trade regulation law” to certification area name consistent with headings and references elsewhere in subchapter; within subdivision (b), allows certification committee discretion whether to request samples of administrative, trial, or appellate memoranda or briefs from an applicant rather than mandating the submission of such materials. Subchapter 6-23 Standards for Certification of a Board Certified Labor and Employment Lawyer 8. Rule 6-23.3 Minimum Standards Summary: Within subdivision (c), expands qualifying experience to include service as a judge, hearing officer, arbitrator, or mediator in the 30 days’ minimum involvement in litigation and/or administrative proceedings; within subdivision (e) provides authority for the board of legal specialization and education or the labor and employment law certification committee to establish policies applicable to this rule. 9. Rule 6-23.4 Recertification Summary: Within subdivision (a), removes reference to language in 6-23.3(b) and restates that subdivision language verbatim; within subdivision (b) removes reference to rule 6-23.3(c) and restates that subdivision language verbatim, with proposed changes; within subdivision (c), adds authority for the board of legal specialization and education or the labor and employment law certification committee to establish policies applicable to this rule; also within subdivision (c), eliminates reference to rule 6-23.3(e) and restates subdivision language verbatim regarding how the education requirement may be satisfied. Chapter 10 Rules Governing the Investigation and Prosecution of the Unlicensed Practice of Law Subchapter 10-2 Definitions 10. Rule 10-2.1 Generally Summary: Within subdivision (a)(2), clarifies language regarding a person’s use of the title “paralegal” or “legal assistant.” Chapter 17 Authorized House Counsel Subchapter 17-1 Generally 11. Rule 17-1.2 Definitions Summary: Within subdivision (a)(6), rearranges wording of rule to clarify that an authorized house counsel must reside in Florida or soon relocate to Florida. Chapter 18 Military Legal Assistance Counsel Rule Subchapter 18-1 Generally 12. Rule 18-1.2 Definitions Summary: Within subdivision (a)(4), expands definition of “authorized legal assistance attorney” to also include a person who completes a resident military officer basic course which qualifies the person to be a JAG officer in their particular military service. STANDING BOARD POLICIES 500 Series – Committees, Sections and Divisions 13. Policy 5.10 Standing Committees Summary: Conforms name changes, additions, or deletions of various committees as necessary. 14. Policy 5.60 Section Budget Policies Summary: Based on suggested revisions within newly proposed SBP 5.63, deletes subdivision (f) regarding distribution of dues proceeds and redesignates subsequent subdivisions appropriately. 15. Policy 5.63 Administrative Support Policy Summary: New proposed policy for calculating the amount each section is to reimburse The Florida Bar for support services, including 80 percent of general and administrative allocation. Section charges range from $12.50 per paying member to $17.50, effective July 1, 2006. Allows in certain circumstances for support in excess of the amount collected, and for return of any excess paid if support costs are less. 600 Series – Continuing Legal Education 16. Policy 6.31 Distribution of Proceeds Summary: Changes codify the recently approved formula for distribution of CLE proceeds or losses between The Florida Bar and either co-sponsoring sections or the Out of State Practitioners Division. Effective July 1, 2005 distribution will be on a net basis after all costs, direct and indirect, have been paid. 1500 Series – Lawyer Regulation Policies 17. Policy 15.20 Recusal of Board Members Summary: Consistent with recent changes in policy 15.10, adds language within subdivision (a) to clarify that the president or presiding officer may order recusal of a board member in a disciplinary matter upon concurrence of a majority of the board; further clarifies that a recused member may not participate in any manner of discussions with any member or group of members of the board concerning the matter; adds new language stating that a recused member should not be present when the matter is being debated by the board. BLSE POLICIES 18. Policy 2.11 Exam Preparation and Administration, Applicant Misconduct Summary: Adds new subdivision (f) re applicant misconduct, stating that failure to follow staff or administrator instructions pertaining to the examination or its administration shall disqualify an applicant’s exam and application; redesignates subsequent subdivisions appropriately. 19. Policy 2.13 Applicant Review Process for Certification or Recertification Summary: Within subdivision (a), adds language to authorize area committee review and investigation of an application for certification in an area other than that overseen by the committee; also within subdivision (a), adds new language allowing applicant review by other members of the area committee or other committees in situations where a fair judgment cannot or might not be rendered due to actual or perceived conflict. 20. 300 Series – Certification Program Accreditation Summary: New proposed series of policies, to establish procedures and criteria to guide BLSE in its review and evaluation of programs and organizations that issue various board certifications to members of The Florida Bar. 3.01 Authority and Purpose 3.02 Definitions 3.03 Eligibility for Accreditation 3.04 Minimum Standards for Lawyer Certification 3.05 Minimum Standards for Lawyer Recertification 3.06 Applicant Procedural Requirements 3.07 Application for Accreditation 3.08 Evaluation Subcommittee 3.09 Evaluation Subcommittee Action 3.10 BLSE Action 3.11 Duration of Accreditation 3.12 Advertisement of Accreditation 3.13 Revocation of Accreditation 3.14 Revocation Process 3.15 Annual Renewal 3.16 Fees 3.17 Disclosure of Information BYLAWS 21. Health Law Section Summary: Within Article II (Purposes), adds a mission statement for the section; within Article IV (Executive Council) deletes outdated provisions dealing with terms of office during the section’s first year of existence after adoption of its bylaws; within Article IX (Committees) adds a Communications and Technology Committee, deletes the Substantive Law Committee, renames the Education Committee as the Education, Training and Information Committee, deletes the Nominating and Legislative Committees as full committees, and renames and reconfigures the Section Administration Committee as the Section Effectiveness Committee, to now include Nominating and Legislative Subcommittees; and within Article X (Miscellaneous) revises effective date of bylaws. 22. Tax Section Summary: Within Article VI, Section 4, changes the structure of the Federal Tax Division into five separate subdivisions and designated committees, with assistant directors who report to the division director; within Article VIII, Section 3, adds requirement that a proposed legislative position be within the scope of both Articles I and Section I of Article VIII of the section bylaws rather than one or the other. CLIENTS’ SECURITY FUND REGULATIONS 23. Regulation 14 Definition of Useful Services Summary: Revises regulation that states CSF claims “will be denied” if useful services were performed to a claimant, to read that claims “may be denied” in such instances; adds a definition of useful services. Proposed Board of Governors actions Proposed Board of Governors actions
12 Views no discussions Tweet Share NewsRegional Guyana budget cuts ruled unconstitutional by: – July 19, 2012 Sharing is caring! Share Share Guyana’s Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall peruses the 33-page preliminary decision by Chief Justice Ian Chang delivered on Wednesday, on the government’s application to the Supreme Court for an interim order to allow the minister of finance to access money cut from the National BudgetGEORGETOWN, Guyana (GINA) — Guyana’s acting chief justice, Ian Chang, has ruled that the National Assembly has no power under the constitution to reduce the National Estimates when they are presented for approval.The chief justice in a preliminary ruling stated that, in relation to the National Estimates, the National Assembly “performs a gate-keeping function, a power of disapproval is not contemplated by the Constitution.”Attorney general and minister of legal affairs, Anil Nandlall was updating reporters on the preliminary decision by the chief justice delivered on Wednesday, on the government’s application to the Supreme Court for an interim order to allow the minister of finance to access monies cut from the National Budget. According to the ruling, he now has the power to do so, if necessary. An application for a stay of execution for the amended order granted was submitted by senior counsel Rex McKay immediately after the ruling. This was objected to by the attorney general and refused by the chief justice after hearing arguments on both sides. While the case is still ongoing and has been adjourned to September 6, 2012, Nandlall stated, “I am pleased with the court’s ruling. My submissions have been vindicated.” He said that, according to the chief justice’s ruling, when the National Assembly cut the 2012 National Estimates and Expenditures, “they acted outside of the constitution and therefore unconstitutionally.”Nandlall said also that “the court proceeds to say that the minister of finance is resided with the power under the constitution and the law, to withdraw from the Contingency and the Consolidated Funds, whenever the minister has formed the opinion that there is a need to do so, and that is what the law says.”More importantly, he noted that with regard to the preliminary pronouncement of the court that the reduction is unconstitutional, “the minister is now free to exercise his statutory and constitutional powers; which is to withdraw from the Consolidated and/or the Contingency Funds for the purpose of funding agencies where he feels that there has been an insufficient allocation made.”With respect to the vindication of his submissions that the cuts were unconstitutional, Nandlall referred to page 17 of the judgment, which states: “Applying that doctrine to the interpretation of article 218, it does appear to the court that it was not permissible for the National Assembly to cut or to reduce the estimates and expenditures to any particular figure since in so doing, the National Assembly was both determining and approving such estimates. If the drafters of the Constitution has wanted the National Assembly to exercise such a power they would have easily conferred such a power on it in the Constitution in express terms as was done in India — see Article 113 (2) of the Constitution of India; or Australia.”The chief justice’s ruling is that the minister of finance, based upon his opinion as outlined in the constitution and the Financial Management and Accountability Act, “is free to form an opinion as to whether or not he needs additional monies in respect of the Estimates and if the minister forms that opinion, then he is free to withdraw the money and then seek Parliamentary approval.”In relation to the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC), because that body is a direct charge on the Consolidated Fund, the chief justice made an order in relation to that agency in particular. In relation to the remaining reliefs which are the substantive reliefs, those are left to be granted when the matter is fully heard and determined.Nandlall explained that the Constitution allows the minister of finance to access monies from the Consolidated Fund in two ways, one before going to Parliament, and the other subsequent to going to Parliament. Thus the chief justice in his ruling has said that because the ERC is a direct charge on the Consolidated Fund, it is not subject to parliamentary approval.Additionally, the chief justice has ruled that: “if the minister of finance finds that the amounts appropriated by the Appropriation Act are insufficient, it’s open to him to lay before the National Assembly, a Supplementary Estimate of Expenditure under Article 218 (3) of the Constitution. “Additionally, if he is satisfied that there is an urgent need for expenditure for which provision has not been made, it is open to him to approve a Contingency Fund advance or advances by the issuance of drawing rights …”This ruling, the attorney general stated, has paved the way for the minister now to exercise “his opinion and his statutory powers for all of the budget cuts.”The case is divided into two parts, interlocutory and substantive. The interlocutory part has been concluded, with the substantive action left to be determined. Caribbean News Now
HEAD coach of the Golden Jaguars, Michael Johnson, has made it clear that Guyana will not be a walkover at this year’s CONCACAF Gold Cup, when they face-off against defending champions USA and regional rivals Trinidad and Tobago, as well as Panama, in Group D of the 16-team tournament. “We’re going to enjoy it! Nobody really gave us a chance to be here, and I’d imagine that nobody would really give us a chance to get out the group,” Johnson boldly stated.Guyana’s first game is against USA on June 18 in Minneapolis, after which, coach Michael Johnson and his squad will travel to Cleveland to take on Panama on June 22 at the FirstEnergy Stadium, before playing their final group game against Trinidad and Tobago on June 26 at the Children’s Mercy Park in Kansas.Speaking at the draw in Los Angeles, Johnson said that he’s banking on a profoundly skilled group of players he strongly believes in “and they believe that on any given day, we could beat any team in CONCACAF”.Meanwhile, president of the Guyana Football Federation (GFF) Wayne Forde pointed out that “Guyana could not have been in a better group. We have everything to play for and absolutely nothing to lose. The earlier projection for national visibility has just doubled; this is simply a win-win for our beloved Golden Jaguars.T&T are old foes that will have all the pressure on them and USA are desperately trying to rebuild their confidence which will play into the strength of our boys.”Ian Greenwood, the GFF’s Technical Director, pointed out that despite the group being strong, “we know what we can do against Trinidad – we played them recently and performed well. Obviously, it’s very, very strong with Panama just coming out of the World Cup, and USA as well, but we’re very excited about what we can do in preparation for these games.”The 2019 Gold Cup features an expanded field, with 16 teams for the first time, including first-time entrants Bermuda and Guyana.The United States will host the majority of the matches, but this year’s tournament will feature group-stage games in Costa Rica and Jamaica – the first time Gold Cup games have been hosted outside of the US, Canada or Mexico.