As it is well known,lawyering is not a solid for profit business.It is rather a profession by which the lawyer gives legal advice representing clients at courts of law or administrative tribunals and in return,gets remuneration or payment for the services delivered.Even though payment of money is involved in the contract of service,it doesn't mean a lawyer needs payment in every case.Since lawyering is a profession one pursues to stand for justice,lawyers must give free legal service to those who can't afford to pay.Actually,it is being done in Ethiopia too.In Ethiopia,every federal lawyer must give 50 hours of free service to those who can't pay.But the problem is not on the time or hours spent but the problem of not giving equal weight to paid and free services.If it is free service,some lawyers prepare poor statements of claim and/or defense,miss court sessions and and even if they appear,they come unprepared.This is unethical. It needs correction.What is your opinion on the issue? P
Force Majeure and Hardship under UNCISG and Ethiopian law (By our professional guest author Yidnekachew Tadele - LL.B., LL.M (Federalism Studies) and LL.M Candidate (International Investment Law) Honourable yidnekachew is currently working as a judge at Addis Ababa City Appelate Court.
Introduction The article that is entitled Force Majeure and Hardship under UNCISG and Ethiopian law discusses only about UNCISG and Ethiopian law. The paper doesn’t discuss about other UN convection or other countries’ laws. The article has five parts. The first part discuss about the general concept of force majeure and hardships. The second part discusses about the similarity and differences of force majeure and hardship. The Third one discusses about force majeure and hardship under UNCISG. The fourth part discusses about force majeure and hardship under Ethiopian law. Under the fifth and the last part the article the writer concludes the paper and gives some recommendations.
It is a great observation. I have seen the negligence of the poor in my own eyes when the lawyer missed two consecutive court adjournments and the client asked for a third adjournment though it was't accepted by the court. Anyways,keep your good work up Eyassu.
ReplyDeleteIt is a good observation. However, as I myself is an attorney, I need to raise the problem of the courts as contributory factor for the problem. for instance, a case adjourned for 9;00 in the morning could be heard at 6:15 this means the lawyer will louse more than 3 hours needlessly. so with this kind of practice how can we expect lawyers to provide effective probono service. to sum up, the surrounding factors shall be examined as well.
ReplyDelete