Hearings: Lawyers cash in

A LAWYER’S bill of more than N$600 000 for no more than two months’ work? Entirely justifiable and reasonable, say two legal practitioners who were involved in the disciplinary hearing of two senior Namibia Development Corporation managers who face dismissal from the NDC over their involvement in the disappearance of an investment of N$55 million of the parastatal’s money.

Lawyers Lucius Murorua and Nate Ndauendapo, who were two of the members of a three-person panel that presided over the disciplinary hearing of NDC Managing Director Abdool Aboobakar and NDC Finance Manager Addis Faul, have slapped the NDC with bills of over N$657 000 and N$646 000 respectively for the work they performed as part of the disciplinary hearing. Both lawyers yesterday justified the size of the bills that they presented to the NDC.They were set to have a meeting with NDC officials over their accounts yesterday, after the parastatal indicated that it was not satisfied with the costs of the two lawyers’ services, but that meeting has been rescheduled for today, Ndauendapo said.The two lawyers’ accounts for reading the record of the disciplinary hearing makes up the main portion of the bills that they submitted to the NDC.Murorua and Ndauendapo each billed the NDC a total of N$482 880 for that task.They had perused a total of 4 024 folios – lawyer’s terminology for reading written material – at a cost of N$120 per folio.A folio is actually a hundred words, with an average A4-size typewritten page amounting to about two folios, according to Ndauendapo.Both Ndauendapo and Murorua defended their bills as adhering strictly to the tariff guidelines set by the Law Society of Namibia for work performed by legal practitioners in Namibia.”It’s not uncommon, if you compare it to other professions,” said Murorua about the size of his bill.”I don’t think it’s exorbitant,” Ndauendapo said.”We are playing by the rules.”According to the Law Society’s tariff guidelines, which were issued in August 2004, a legal practitioner who has been practising law for more than ten years can charge between N$90 and N$120 per folio for the perusal of material.Ndauendapo and Murorua both took the opportunity to bill the NDC at the top end of that suggested scale.The Law Society’s tariff guidelines also state that legal practitioners can bill their clients based on the amount of time it takes to read written material.When that approach is chosen, the tariff guidelines suggest lawyers with more than ten years’ experience in the legal profession can charge between N$750 and N$1 500 per hour spent reading material.Eben de Klerk, Financial Manager of the Law Society, said on behalf of the lawyers’ body yesterday that legal practitioners are expected to opt for the use of a time-based calculation of their fees if that results in a more reasonable size of their eventual bill for their clients.”An unfortunate, opportunistic misinterpretation of the tariff guidelines,” is how he described the size of the bills that Murorua and Ndauendapo presented to the NDC.De Klerk added that a client dissatisfied with lawyer’s accounts can lodge an appeal with the Law Society’s Taxation Committee or its Ethics Committee to have the account checked.Murorua said the main portion of his bill, which was for the reading of material, conformed to the Law Society’s tariff guidelines.”They are premised on perusal tariffs.It’s a straightforward mathematical calculation,” he said about him asking the NDC to pay him N$120 for every hundred words that he read as part of the disciplinary hearing’s work.”I did not consider that appropriate,” he answered when asked why he had not chosen to bill the NDC for the time spent reading the documents.Murorua estimated the time that he devoted to work on the disciplinary hearing at “close to two months”.Ndauendapo said about eleven days were devoted to the job.They see nothing wrong with being paid over N$600 000 each for that quantity of work, both of them insisted.Each of them said they had fully briefed the NDC beforehand about the fees they charged for their work.Ndauendapo said he specifically also informed the NDC that his billing would be guided by Law Society tariffs, and he also annexed the relevant portions of the tariff guidelines to a quotation that he sent to the NDC.He said he stated that he was billing at an hourly rate of between N$550 and N$850, and that he was also charging for perusal per folio.The NDC wrote back to him to inform him that it accepted his quotation, Ndauendapo said.He added that the disciplinary panel did not have any control over the scope that the hearing took on once it had started.Eight witnesses in all were called to testify, with the result that the record of the hearing increased in size accordingly, he said.He answered “yes”, without hesitation, when he was asked whether he thought his N$646 000 bill was justifiable and reasonable.It should also be kept in mind that the Law Society guidelines allow lawyers to take into account the importance of the matter they are dealing with and the size of an amount of money involved in the matter when they determine their fees, Murorua and Ndauendapo added.In the Aboobakar and Faul disciplinary hearing, they were dealing with an important matter, where a huge amount of money was involved, they argued.Both lawyers yesterday justified the size of the bills that they presented to the NDC.They were set to have a meeting with NDC officials over their accounts yesterday, after the parastatal indicated that it was not satisfied with the costs of the two lawyers’ services, but that meeting has been rescheduled for today, Ndauendapo said.The two lawyers’ accounts for reading the record of the disciplinary hearing makes up the main portion of the bills that they submitted to the NDC.Murorua and Ndauendapo each billed the NDC a total of N$482 880 for that task.They had perused a total of 4 024 folios – lawyer’s terminology for reading written material – at a cost of N$120 per folio.A folio is actually a hundred words, with an average A4-size typewritten page amounting to about two folios, according to Ndauendapo.Both Ndauendapo and Murorua defended their bills as adhering strictly to the tariff guidelines set by the Law Society of Namibia for work performed by legal practitioners in Namibia.”It’s not uncommon, if you compare it to other professions,” said Murorua about the size of his bill. “I don’t think it’s exorbitant,” Ndauendapo said.”We are playing by the rules.”According to the Law Society’s tariff guidelines, which were issued in August 2004, a legal practitioner who has been practising law for more than ten years can charge between N$90 and N$120 per folio for the perusal of material.Ndauendapo and Murorua both took the opportunity to bill the NDC at the top end of that suggested scale.The Law Society’s tariff guidelines also state that legal practitioners can bill their clients based on the amount of time it takes to read written material.When that approach is chosen, the tariff guidelines suggest lawyers with more than ten years’ experience in the legal profession can charge between N$750 and N$1 500 per hour spent reading material.Eben de Klerk, Financial Manager of the Law Society, said on behalf of the lawyers’ body yesterday that legal practitioners are expected to opt for the use of a time-based calculation of their fees if that results in a more reasonable size of their eventual bill for their clients.”An unfortunate, opportunistic misinterpretation of the tariff guidelines,” is how he described the size of the bills that Murorua and Ndauendapo presented to the NDC.De Klerk added that a client dissatisfied with lawyer’s accounts can lodge an appeal with the Law Society’s Taxation Committee or its Ethics Committee to have the account checked.Murorua said the main portion of his bill, which was for the reading of material, conformed to the Law Society’s tariff guidelines.”They are premised on perusal tariffs.It’s a straightforward mathematical calculation,” he said about him asking the NDC to pay him N$120 for every hundred words that he read as part of the disciplinary hearing’s work.”I did not consider that appropriate,” he answered when asked why he had not chosen to bill the NDC for the time spent reading the documents.Murorua estimated the time that he devoted to work on the disciplinary hearing at “close to two months”.Ndauendapo said about eleven days were devoted to the job.They see nothing wrong with being paid over N$600 000 each for that quantity of work, both of them insisted.Each of them said they had fully briefed the NDC beforehand about the fees they charged for their work.Ndauendapo said he specifically also informed the NDC that his billing would be guided by Law Society tariffs, and he also annexed the relevant portions of the tariff guidelines to a quotation that he sent to the NDC.He said he stated that he was billing at an hourly rate of between N$550 and N$850, and that he was also charging for perusal per folio.The NDC wrote back to him to inform him that it accepted his quotation, Ndauendapo said.He added that the disciplinary panel did not have any control over the scope that the hearing took on once it had started.Eight witnesses in all were called to testify, with the result that the record of the hearing increased in size accordingly, he said.He answered “yes”, without hesitation, when he was asked whether he thought his N$646 000 bill was justifiable and reasonable.It should also be kept in mind that the Law Society guidelines allow lawyers to take into account the importance of the matter they are dealing with and the size of an amount of money involved in the matter when they determine their fees, Murorua and Ndauendapo added.In the Aboobakar and Faul disciplinary hearing, they were dealing with an important matter, where a huge amount of money was involved, they argued.