The Duty to Verify — Lawyers, Plaintiffs, and Counterclaims
This post discusses general legal principles and case law for public education. It does not allege misconduct by any specific individual or party. All examples are illustrative only, and factual determinations remain the responsibility of the courts.
Part 3: The Duty to Verify — Lawyers, Plaintiffs, and Counterclaims
⚖️ Professional Responsibility
When a counterclaim is filed, the lawyer has a duty to ensure that the pleadings are properly grounded in fact and law. Courts expect counsel to:
Verify that documents relied upon are authentic and accurate.
Avoid presenting particulars that are misleading, outdated, or fraudulent.
Advise clients against advancing claims that cannot withstand scrutiny.
This duty is rooted in professional ethics: a lawyer must not knowingly file pleadings that mislead the court.
Plaintiffs who bring a counterclaim also bear responsibility. They must:
Provide their lawyer with truthful and accurate particulars.
Check that the documents they rely on — such as subsale transaction files — reflect current and genuine transactions, not outdated ones.
Understand that presenting fabricated or outdated material facts undermines their credibility and may expose them to liability.
📌 Material Facts in Context
In property disputes, transaction files are often used to contest valuations. For credibility:
Material facts should reflect current transactions, not those from five or six years ago.
Particulars must match actual transaction dates and parties.
Transactions attributed to deceased persons or misstated dates raise serious questions of authenticity.
🧩 Case Law Connection
Panatron shows that fraud cannot be excused by shifting blame to the victim.
Tong Chen reinforces that victims are entitled to rely on representations without double‑checking.
Extending these principles: lawyers and plaintiffs cannot rely on fraudulent subsales to support a counterclaim. The duty to verify lies with those who file the claim.
💡 Why This Matters
Counterclaims are serious pleadings. When subsale particulars are fabricated or outdated, both lawyers and plaintiffs risk undermining their case. Courts expect honesty and accuracy, and professional responsibility requires that fraudulent documents are not placed before the court.
Disclaimer applies.
Comments