Law Association faces dispute over fees, spending

A junior attorney has strongly criticised the Law Association’s president's report to the membership on the operations of the organisation ahead of a special general meeting (SGM) scheduled for February 7.

The recently published rebuttal opinion piece expressed concerns over financial management, transparency and membership fees.

The opinion piece was posted on the Association of Junior Attorneys website, but made it clear it did not represent the views of the association. A disclaimer said it was the opinion of a junior ordinary member of LATT’s council.

A requisition for the SGM was submitted on January 14. It alleged a lack of transparency, mismanagement of funds and questionable financial practices. It also called for a reduction in annual subscription fees.

Lynette Seebaran-Suite, SC, president of LATT, dismissed the call, saying it would be foolhardy to lower fees at this time.

In her report, Seebaran-Suite said, “We are operating on 2007 fees, and inflation has cut into the value of the dollar.

“Inflation has meant that the 2024 dollar has 42 per cent less buying power than the 2007 dollar."

LATT now collects some $5.2 million in fees, with total operating expenses, including wages, projects, events and subsidies, amounting to $4 million, the report said.

She told members if the petition’s resolution were carried it would negatively affect LATT’s annual income, while savings to individual members would be “very small.”

“The annual subscription fees amount to no more than a few (no more than two) billable hours in any band of members.”

LATT’s president attributed rising operational costs to efforts to modernise the association and enhance its capacity to serve its members, citing strategic initiatives such as policy development and long-term sustainability planning.

However, the rebuttal piece argued that not all council members supported the president’s position, particularly on the issue of fees.

The junior attorney said from the report it appeared LATT was failing to collect millions in membership fees from delinquent members.

“If the LATT is not prudent enough in collecting the fees it is entitled to, then, along with the allegations of massive savings and profitability, it is clear that the LATT does not need the money it has left on the table to continue running.

“However, this also means that members who do pay help cover the expenses of members who do not pay.”

Further alleged discrepancies in the reported revenue were highlighted in the sums collected in membership fees.

The attorney said the total revenue the LATT is entitled to collect should fall between $8.1 million and $9.3 million, based on reported membership figures.

“Even with 1,000 members left out, this leaves a total of $8,159,500 to $9,314,000 that the LATT was entitled to collect as at April, 2024...

“It appears that if the LATT collected $5,200,000 in 2024 as reported, it did not collect the proper amount of money owed to it.”

The rebuttal insisted LATT could “clearly survive and thrive, even with the proposed reduction of fees.”

The attorney also said while LATT’s expenses have soared, member benefits have not significantly improved. This was an issue raised in the January requisition.

The junior council member took issue with “exponential increase in salaries,” which is expected to exceed $3 million in 2025, compared to $2.34 million in 2024, nearly double the 2016 figure of $1.5 million.

The member also criticised LATT’s justification for increased salaries, arguing that a salary survey – which claimed LATT staff earn 20-40 per cent less than their corporate counterparts – was flawed.

The report allegedly compared LATT salaries to private-sector businesses rather than comparable nonprofit organisations such as the Medical Board or the Institute of Chartered Accountants.

“Any justification as to salaries based on this report is fundamentally flawed and does not reflect the proper picture of comparative salaries.”

The attorney also noted there was increased operating expenditure to $2.1 million in 2024, with total expenditure surpassing $4.9 million.

The junior attorney argued that LATT had more than enough funds to operate even with a fee reduction, pointing to the savings LATT is allegedly sitting on.

“The fact remains that, if the LATT is sitting on $15,000,000 in savings, the LATT can collect no fees for the next two-three years and still meet operating expenses.”