The Supreme Court has ruled that lawyers cannot be held liable for poor service.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court made a significant decision on Tuesday, stating that lawyers cannot be held accountable for "deficiency in service" under the Consumer Protection Act and therefore cannot be sued before consumer courts. Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal, who presided over the bench, explained that clients have a significant amount of control over how an advocate provides their services, making it a personal contract rather than a typical service.

The court also emphasized that the legal profession is unique and cannot be compared to other professions due to its specialized nature of work. The purpose of the Consumer Protection Act is to protect consumers from unfair and unethical business practices, and the legislature never intended to include professionals or their services under its purview.

The bench further stated that complaints of "deficiency in service" against advocates practicing the legal profession would not be valid under the Consumer Protection Act, as the services provided by advocates fall under the exclusionary part of the definition of "service" in Section 2 of the Act.

This decision was made in response to a plea filed by bar bodies and individuals, challenging a 2007 verdict of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The Commission had ruled that advocates and their services fall under the Consumer Protection Act of 1986.

The Supreme Court clarified that the purpose of the Consumer Protection Act is to provide timely and effective resolution of consumer disputes. If the Act were to include all professional services, it would lead to an overwhelming number of litigations in the forums established under the Act due to its inexpensive and summary nature.

The bench also recognized that the legal profession is not commercial in nature but rather a service-oriented and noble profession. Advocates play a crucial role in the justice delivery system and are expected to uphold the principles of utmost good faith, integrity, fairness, and loyalty while representing their clients.

The court emphasized that advocates have a duty not only to their clients but also to the court and the opposite party, as they are responsible officers of the court and an important part of the administration of justice. The legal profession is unique and cannot be compared to any other profession due to its impact on the entire justice system.

In 2007, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission had held that advocates fall under the definition of "service" in the Consumer Protection Act and can be sued by their clients for any deficiency in service. However, the Supreme Court stayed this verdict in 2009.

Section 2 of the Consumer Protection Act defines "service" as any type of service made available to potential users, including but not limited to banking, insurance, transport, entertainment, and the provision of information. However, this does not apply to services provided free of charge or under a personal contract.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court recognized the vital role played by advocates in the justice system and their responsibility to uphold the principles of the legal profession. Therefore, they cannot be equated with any other profession and are excluded from the purview of the Consumer Protection Act.

[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]
[Generative AI is experimental.]