Professional ethics

Three cheers for the Court of Appeal's decision to prevent a young solicitor working within a ten-mile radius of his former firm (see [2000] Gazette, 11 May, 1).

There is no suggestion in this case that Mr Stocks or his new firm acted improperly or sought to entice clients.

But the decision was necessary to redress the prevailing fashion for some other young solicitors to try to take clients from firms that have given them a living for years.It is my view that, unfortunately, some young solicitors are not very ethical concerning this aspect and seem to think that the world owes them a living.

They think they are entitled to work for a firm and then willy-nilly damage its goodwill by enticing clients away.

They think that it is their right and entitlement, which it is not morally, and should not be legally.In the professional guide, the Law Society says it is perfectly proper for assistant solicitors to write to clients of the firm they have worked for if there is no restrictive covenant.

Nonetheless, it used to be the case that solicitors were honourable and did not do things like that.We are now littered with lots of solicitors brought up on the cut-price conveyancing and advertising system which has done nothing but harm to the profession.That is why I say thank God for Mr Justice Aldous, who led the Court of Appeal, and Judge Stretton, who made the original decision, which shows that we have judges with backbone and common sense who are not affected by the modern soft and silly philosophy.Wallace Bogan, Wallace Bogan & Co, London