Supreme Court terms lawyers' vigilance 'foundational' to protecting clients' cases from dismissal

Islamabad: The Supreme Court emphasized on Saturday that a lawyer's constant vigilance is "foundational" for safeguarding a client's case from dismissal due to non-prosecution. This conviction echoes the worldwide legal maxim "Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt," meaning that the law supports those who are alert and attentive to their rights.

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, presiding over the eight-page judgment, stated that when a lawyer lacks the sense of professional duty, the client, who placed their trust in them, ultimately suffers. He also highlighted that the client must be vigilant in pursuing their case without relying solely on their lawyer's actions.

The court allowed two civil revisions to be converted into appeals after the lawyer could not appear, due to a Coronavirus infection. The Supreme Court had previously rejected three civil petitions seeking the restoration of review petitions in September, expressing regret that litigants sometimes treat court leniency as a mere formality.

Last February, the petitioner, Safdar Ali Butt, filed a case before the Lahore High Court, but both revisions were dismissed for non-prosecution due to his lawyer's inability to reach the bench due to the Coronavirus. The petitioner then filed restoration applications the next day, but they were also dismissed, leading to the present appeal to the Supreme Court.

Justice Mazhar stressed that lawyers must track deadlines, court schedules, and benches to avoid missing cases due to human error. They should also keep clients updated on case progress, risks, and settlement offers, if any. The judge emphasized that conflicts of interest should be avoided, and in cases with overlapping commitments, lawyers should arrange for alternate representation.

The judgment underlined that dismissals due to lawyer negligence and lack of diligence tarnish the professional image and client's trust. Courts cannot ignore the doctrine of case restoration, which allows courts to revive dismissed lawsuits if sufficient cause is provided and the demands of justice warrant it. The court's approach should be balanced, considering legal limitations and avoiding premeditated recklessness.