Draft Laws


Article 34

Non-compliance with Continuing Legal Education

  1. If an advocate fails to comply with the provisions of this Sub-section or is determined by the Board to be deficient in his continuing legal education requirement, he shall be so notified in writing by the Board of the nature of such non-compliance and shall be given (60) days to remedy such non-compliance.
  2. If the Board finds an advocate not to be in compliance with the provisions of this Sub-section or the rules of the Board, it shall so report to the Federal Bar and recommend that the advocate be placed on suspended status.

Article 35

Waivers and Extensions

  1. The provisions of this Sub-section shall be strictly enforced.
  2. A waiver of the requirement of continuing legal education provided in this Sub-section may be made by the Board, in whole or in part, if a practicing advocate, because of circumstances beyond his control, cannot in any reasonable manner meet the requirement for continuing education in any given reporting year.
  3. An application for waiver shall set forth the reason why an advocate cannot comply with the minimum requirements and the efforts made to comply as well as a plan setting forth how the advocate expects to continue his education during the period of time for which strict compliance is waived.
  4. Waivers may be granted by the Board for such period as it may determine. Upon termination of the waiver, the Board may make such additional educational requirements as it deems appropriate.
  5. The Board may grant an extension of time for the completion of an advocate’s continuing legal education requirements upon such terms as the Board shall require.

Sub-section Three – Pro bono publico Legal Practice

Article 36

Mandatory Pro bono publico Legal Practice

  • An advocate shall provide pro bono publico professional services to those unable to pay.
  • An advocate shall provide a minimum of fifty (50) hours of pro bono publico services every year.
  • Pro bono publico services include legal advice, representations and any other activities for ensuring access to justice and improving the rule of law and the advocate’s profession.
  • An advocate shall keep records of the fulfillment of his pro bono publico obligations, including the date, type and hours spent for each service.



Article 37

Right to Establish a Law Firm

  1. Any licensed advocate has the right to establish a law firm in collaboration with one or more licensed advocates.
  2. The minimum number of licensed advocates required for establishing a law firm shall be two.

Article 38

Form and Liability

  • A law firm shall take the form of a limited liability partnership.
  • A law firm shall have its own legal personality.
  • Subject to Article 53 of this Proclamation, a law firm shall continue in existence in spite of any change in its membership.
  • Without prejudice to the generality of Sub-article 2 of this Article, a law firm shall have the capacity to:
  1. enter into contracts; and
  2. own property.
  • The partners of a law firm shall have limited liability towards third parties, except for liabilities to their clients arising out of matters they personally handle.
  • The rendering of legal services through a law firm shall not make the legal profession a trade or an investment under Ethiopian trade and investment laws.

                                                          Article 39

Scope of Services

  • A law firm can engage in legal practice in a similar manner as an individual advocate in accordance with this Proclamation and any other applicable law.
  • A law firm shall primarily engage in practicing law.
  • Without prejudice to Sub-article 2 of this Article, a law firm can provide other services that are related and complementary to legal practice. The particulars for the application of this Sub-article shall be determined in a regulation to be issued by the Federal Bar for the implementation of this Proclamation.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

13 replies »

  1. Dear Abraham :first of all wants to grateful you for all your doings from the on set of this page.This page is from where we can get a lot of ideas as regard with the countries and foreign laws.In some instances I use to see some unusual users who are not informed of this page is a common page for a lot of persons and instead try to quarrel with their idea opponents.If we under stand the( why for this page is established) we have to avoid non academics and vulgar ideas and words that doesn’t add a value.

  2. I suggest that a provision that enables advocates to work in private organization as permanent employee like university lecturers, health professionals etc, depending on the agreement to be made b/n the employer and the advocate. B/se the existing proclamation which denies this right is discriminating when it is seen with other professionals who are legally permitted to work simultaneously as permanent employee and privately being licensed even in government institution. The law which denies the advocates this right is also against the advocates’ social security.

  3. As a lawyer , my views are goes to Article 6 &122 of the draft proc, respectively. .is there A lawyer also for English . will take you a custody ASSAP

  4. As a lawyer , my views are goes to Article 6 &122 of the draft proc, respectively. Article 6 of the draft proclamation it does not comprised the rest of of lawyers who are currently engaged in different government and non governmental organisation and it also stipulates the minimum 2 years experiance that enables to be an advocate in federal first instance court as per the content of previous proclamation. The draft proc, it does not mentioned the stages of advocates considering that the hierarchy of the federal court even though these are exhaustively take part in to account in the directive and regulation. The procl, it does not give as any clue about this junctures. The Second one is , Article 122 of these draft proclamation is not reasonable and persuasive. It provides in order to be an advocate having LLB degree is not required until 2027. which means that, it is tolerable to be an advocate with in diploma. I think that, Most of the drafters are intentionally elongated up to 2027 /for about 15 years in order to benefit the old lawyer who were slept on the society with out updating them selves with in contemporary modern legislations and practically to close the door on the young lawyers via playing on those patient society am highly objected these mysterious and funny act. And it is better if it is corrected before the approval of the proclamation. These are my few views but if I am deeply looked over it no doubt as to enormous problems are found on the draft. You have to leave the tournament of the game for the Young’s.

    • Don’t bother about others lawyers academic qualities. Only try your best to make your legal knowledge excellent. I darely speak to you that those old lawyers are much better than the today young lawyers.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.