Deposit refund ruling separates correspondence authority from payment instructions

Authority to receive documents and information did not authorise a co-purchaser to collect the entire refunded deposit. The Privy Council dismissed Carleen McFarlane’s Jamaican disciplinary appeal on 23 April.

The tribunals below found that the attorney knew Carl Benjamin had provided the deposit but paid the refund to the other intended purchaser. The Board upheld the conclusion of inexcusable or deplorable negligence. It expressly distinguished that finding from dishonesty.

The Board also rejected procedural-unfairness arguments and declined to reopen concurrent factual findings. It held that restitution of J$350,000 was appropriate. Instructions that the proposed property would be owned in equal shares did not establish authority to repay one purchaser alone.

Complete official HTML judgment reviewed, paragraphs 1–35. Jamaica-origin appeal. The decision did not impugn the attorney’s honesty; later treatment was not checked.