Facts
The complainant, Dr. med. X., concluded an agreement with Klinik S. AG and Klinik T. AG on September 28, 2000, regarding his employment as a visiting doctor. After he was unable to take up this position, he waived his employment and followed a call as a full professor to the University of Zurich. The clinics then sued X. and claimed damages of around 3.5 million francs. The complainant complained about an alleged double representation by lawyers A. and C., who represented the clinics in the damages lawsuit. The Supervisory Commission for Lawyers in the Canton of Zurich discontinued the disciplinary proceedings, as it did not see any violation of professional rules.
The complainant filed a complaint with the FJA and requested the annulment of the decisions of the Administrative Commission of the FJA and the Supervisory Commission for Lawyers. The FJA has combined the two proceedings and has not considered the complaint against the decision of the Supervisory Commission, while it has dismissed the complaint against the decision of the Administrative Commission, insofar as it has considered it.
Considerations
The FJA has established that the complainant is not entitled to file an administrative court appeal against the failure to discipline a lawyer. The supervisory authority can only indirectly influence the behavior of the lawyer by sanctioning him for committed disciplinary offenses afterwards. The complainant has no legitimate interest in the supervisory authority initiating disciplinary proceedings against a suspected lawyer or imposing disciplinary sanctions.
The FJA has also established that the role of the supervisory authority in the lawyer's disciplinary procedure is significantly different from that of the FJA, which is obliged…