Lawyers Ethics And Professional Responsibility Assignment
As the legal profession undergoes structural changes,
longstanding principles of ethics still govern the day-to-day lives of
practising lawyers. This new hornbook on professional responsibility provides a
snapshot of ongoing systemic changes and thoroughly examines the fundamentals
of lawyer and judicial ethics.
Lawyers
Ethics And Professional Responsibility Assignment
As a multifaceted work by academic experts in various fields:
- It
starts with the shifting context of legal services in the contemporary
economy.
- The
theoretical foundation of legal ethics in moral philosophy is continued.
- Provides
debate and actual data regarding professional development and moral
development.
- Gives
a thorough overview of the lawyer ethics law.
- Includes
a thorough overview of current legal services legislation.
The legal expert has two obligations.
The legal system's fundamental precepts, premises, and
procedures in which the lawyer practices are reflected in the principles of
legal ethics, whether written down or not. They also reflect how the profession
views its place in the judicial system. This conception includes the
fundamental tenet that the typical lawyer has a significant public
responsibility in addition to representing private interests, which is common
in democratic nations like the United States, Canada, the member states of the
European Union, and Japan. A lawyer is a court officer essential to maintaining
the fairness of the legal system. Therefore, a lawyer must refrain from using
strategies that would thwart the impartial administration of justice while
putting in much effort to advance a client's interests.
Naturally, the client's and society's interests sometimes align,
and the rules of professional conduct only sometimes spell out what the lawyer
should do in these circumstances. When a lawyer feels a witness is telling the
truth, should the lawyer conduct cross-examination in a way that discredits or
invalidates the witness' testimony? Can he use the rules of evidence to
eliminate arguments that would support the opposition but that he believes to
be true or likely true? Can he benefit from a novice opponent's mistakes?
Should he want a jury trial even though it would not benefit his client to prolong
the proceedings?
Legal systems that operate under various presumptions may
provide different answers to these concerns. A system where the court must
decide the case's merits and a lawyer must present a client's case in the best
possible light under the law may yield different results than one where the
state's obligation to ensure proper administration of justice is given
priority.
https://
Comments
Post a Comment