50.  (1) For the purposes of this Act, an act or omission of a legal practitioner may be considered as constituting misconduct where the act or omission—

(a) involves fraud or dishonesty,

(b) is connected with the provision by the legal practitioner of legal services, which were, to a substantial degree, of an inadequate standard,

(c) where occurring otherwise than in connection with the provision of legal services, would justify a finding that the legal practitioner concerned is not a fit and proper person to engage in the provision of legal services,

(d) consists of an offence under this Act,

(e) in the case of a solicitor, consists of a breach of the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2015 or any regulations made under those Acts,

(f) in the case of a solicitor, consists of an offence under the Solicitors Acts 1954 to 2015,

(g) in the case of a barrister, is likely to bring the barristers’ profession into disrepute,

(h) in the case of a solicitor, is likely to bring the solicitors’ profession into disrepute,

(i) in the case of a legal practitioner who is a managing legal practitioner of a multi-disciplinary practice, consists of a failure by him or her to comply with his or her obligations under this Act as a managing legal practitioner (within the meaning of Part 8),

(j) consists of the commission of an arrestable offence,

(k) consists of the commission of a crime or offence outside the State which, if committed within the State, would be an arrestable offence,

(l) consists of seeking an amount of costs in respect of the provision of legal services, that is grossly excessive,

(m) consists of a breach of this Act or regulations made under it, or

(n) consists of a contravention of section 215(1).

(2) In determining whether an act or omission referred to in paragraph (l) of subsection (1) should be considered as constituting misconduct, the Authority, the Complaints Committee, the Disciplinary Tribunal or, as the case may be, the High Court may have regard to—

(a) the amount by which or the extent to which the amount claimed in the bill of costs was found to be excessive,

(b) whether in the particular circumstances of the legal services performed the amount of the bill of costs appears to be unconscionable, and

(c) whether or not a Legal Costs Adjudicator has found the costs charged to be grossly excessive.

(3) In this section “arrestable offence” has the same meaning as it has in the Criminal Law Act 1997.