Rasma Gulbis v Mikelis Strikis

The case of Rasma Gulbis v Mikelis Strikis involved a dispute between a widow, Rasma Gulbis, and her late husband's solicitor, Mikelis Strikis. Rasma sought the transfer of her deceased husband's interest in a jointly-owned residential property to her sole name. Strikis, who had been appointed as the executor of the estate, performed legal work in this regard but claimed that his role was as executor rather than solicitor for Rasma. Strikis did not provide a fee disclosure or issue a bill of costs to Rasma in accordance with the Legal Profession Act 2004, Part 3.2. Strikis asserted a lien over the Certificate of Title issued in Rasma's name and refused to deliver it to her. The primary issue before the court was to determine whether Strikis was retained by Rasma as her solicitor or was acting solely in his capacity as executor, and whether Strikis had a valid lien over the Certificate of Title.

The court examined whether Strikis had a retainer with Rasma or if his actions were purely in his executor capacity. The court found that Strikis had indeed acted as Rasma's solicitor in the property transfer process, as evidenced by his communications and actions on her behalf. Given that Strikis did not comply with the requirements of the Legal Profession Act 2004, Part 3.2, by not disclosing fees or issuing a bill of costs, the court concluded that Strikis's claim to a lien over the Certificate of Title was invalid. The court further determined that Strikis had no right to withhold the Certificate of Title from Rasma.

The court ordered Strikis to deliver the Certificate of Title to Rasma, and dismissed Strikis's claim to a lien over the document. The court's decision was based on Strikis's failure to adhere to the statutory requirements for legal practitioners, and his improper assertion of a lien over the Certificate of Title. This ruling ensured that Rasma could proceed with the transfer of her deceased husband's interest in the property to her sole name.