Tuesday, June 19, 2012

‘Tender Bender’ at Dundas & Wilson is plugged with partner’s resignation and ‘gardening leave’ in ‘confidential irregularities’ riddle

DUNDAS & WILSON, the well known Edinburgh based law firm who number among their clients, some of Scotland’s former broadsheet newspapers, has been reported to have withdrawn from a tender process and begun an investigation after uncovering unspecified irregularities which appear to have led to the departure of one of it’s partners.

The law firm has reported it had withdrawn a tender after learning that one of it’s partners had come into possession of confidential information that might have prejudiced the tender process. A statement was reported in the Law Society of Scotland’s JournalOnline, hoping to head off further media interest, saying : “The partner concerned has resigned from Dundas & Wilson, and is now on gardening leave".

It was further reported : Interim managing partner Caryn Penley said in a statement (only appearing in the Journal at this time) : “Given the nature of the incident we consulted with the Law Society of Scotland. The circumstances of this are profoundly disappointing for all concerned. In the interests of everyone involved we have acted on this as quickly as possible. Once our investigations are finalised the matter will be referred to our board for further action, and pending that it would not be appropriate to make further comment.”

Elections are currently taking place for the election of a new chairman and a new managing partner at the firm caught in the information fiddle.

There is no statement on the law firm’s website at time of publication, leading to claims clients have been kept in the dark over events.


Anonymous said...

Oh dear, another member of a legal profession Mr McRaskill tells us we should be proud of caught with his hand in the till by the sounds of it - and no doubt right up to the shoulder.

Anonymous said...

Kenny MaTrashkill is not fit to be an MSP. He cannot serve two masters.

Anonymous said...

Their statement doesnt make any sense.If the partner has already resigned then why are they on "gardening leave"?

Rubbish.Who was caught with their fingers in the till and why are the clients being kept in the dark?

Anonymous said...

What is more alarming is that the Scottish lawyer firm reverts to the Law Society of Scotland instead of going straight to the police!

Of course, the Law Society of Scotland are infamous for covering up for criminal Scottish lawyers and in doing so defeating the ends of justice?

Will the Law Society of Scotland report this crooked Scottish lawyer to the police or will they be implicated in the crime for not doing so?

Why must there be a two level natural justice in Scotland?

Everyone in Scotland have to suffer the full force of the law, except for Scottish lawyers who are always 'ABOVE-THE-LAW'?

Anonymous said...

Makes perfect sense...u resign and instead of working your notice you go on gardening leave..simple

Anonymous said...

Oh dearie me - typically ill-informed comments.

1) Gardening leave will apply because the individual who has resigned is subject to a notice period (almost every worker is) and in addition will likely be subject to a restrictive covenant, preventing them from working for a competitor firm for an agreed period - often six months.

2) This does not, on the face of it, appear to be a matter of criminality. It is certainly not a matter of the theft of client (or any other) funds. As the statement clearly says, it is to do with a tender process and a breach of that tender process. It is a common concern in all large businesses - legal or not - who respond to tender invitations. The usual manner to handle these issues in any large business is to refer them to whoever is responsible for ethics and compliance - hence the involvement in this case of the Law Society.

3) There may very well be no clients involved in this matter at all - remember it is to do with a tendering process.

Anonymous said...

Err if some comes into possession of confidential information he shouldn't have there may well be criminality involved but of course we are talking about lawyers here fiddling a tender process so lets not expect anything to come of it.

Anyway what is the tender for?If it involves public funds of any sort then fiddling the information to get it really is criminal,isn't it?