VIOLATION OF THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT FOR ATTORNEYS AS A GROUND FOR AN ATTORNEY’S DISCIPLINARY LIABILITY

Abstract

The relevance of the study is determined by the need to ensure consistency in disciplinary practice concerning attorneys’ violations of professional ethics, as well as to adapt professional and ethical standards to new forms of digital communication and the use of generative artificial intelligence technologies in legal practice. The purpose of the article is to analyse the theoretical and regulatory foundations of an attorney’s disciplinary liability for violations of professional ethics.

The methodological framework of the study comprises general scientific and specialised legal methods. The method of analysis was used to summarise scholarly approaches to understanding the legal nature of an attorney’s disciplinary liability. The formal legal method was applied to examine the provisions of the Law of Ukraine "On the Bar and Practice of Law" and the Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys. The systemic and structural method made it possible to classify the professional and ethical standards of attorneys’ conduct and establish their relationship with other types of disciplinary misconduct.

The article clarifies the legal nature of an attorney’s disciplinary liability and defines it as a special type of legal liability whose distinctive features arise from the attorney’s professional status, the nature of the functions performed, the specific category of persons subject to such liability, and the special procedure for its implementation. It has been established that a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys as a ground for disciplinary liability is of a blanket-reference nature. The professional and ethical standards of attorneys’ conduct have been systematised according to the following principal areas: independence and professional freedom; lawfulness of professional activity; priority of
the client’s interests; prevention of conflicts of interest; confidentiality and protection of attorney–client privilege; competence and good faith; honesty, integrity, and professional reputation; and proper interaction with clients, courts, parties to proceedings, public authorities, and other attorneys.

It has been established that the principal problematic aspects of an attorney’s disciplinary liability include the absence of clear criteria for distinguishing violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys from related disciplinary offences; the regulatory uncertainty of the concepts of a "serious violation" and a "violation undermining the authority of the Ukrainian Bar"; and the absence of specific rules governing the use of generative artificial intelligence. The need to establish statutory rules for the legal classification of related disciplinary offences and to prevent the same act from being classified twice has been substantiated. It is also necessary to define criteria for assessing the seriousness of a violation and requirements for the reasoning of disciplinary bodies’ decisions. It is proposed that the Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys be supplemented with provisions requiring attorneys to verify the accuracy, relevance, and current validity of materials obtained through generative artificial intelligence, protect the confidentiality of client information, and refrain from misleading courts and other participants in legal relations.