Final arguments into whether lawyer Mr. Philip Perinchief was wrongfully dismissed by his employer Mr. Charles Vaucrosson were heard yesterday.

Puisne Judge the Hon. Mr. Justice Ground said he would deliver his ruling at a later date.

Mr. Perinchief has claimed he was wrongfully dismissed from the firm in July, 1990 with only one month's notice.

He now has his own firm and is demanding five months salary from Vaucrosson's as he feels he should have received six months notice.

Mr. Steven Hankey, representing VAucrosson's, said Mr. Perinchief was often behind in his administrative work and fee collections.

Yesterday Mr. Perinchief's lawyer Miss Clare Hatcher, said her client met with his administrative requirements where possible.

"The plaintiff has established that there were no requirements that they were to be done by lawyers and indeed a bundle of time sheets show they were submitted,'' she said.

Miss Hatcher said problems of any significance only arose in June, July and August, after his executive secretary went on maternity leave.

She said the problems caused by incompetent temporary secretaries hired to aid Mr. Perinchief were recognised by the personnel officer and the accounts department. And all problems were dealt with within 10 days of his secretary's return, she said.

With regard to retainers, Miss Hatcher said there was no firm policy which required that cash be accepted up-front.

"In considering whether the alleged breaches set out were fundamental, the period as a whole must be considered,'' she said.

She said Mr. Vaucrosson had not given her client immediate dismissal was because "the breaches were not sufficient and fundamental.'' And she said that a professional employee, such as Mr. Perinchief, who had been employed with a firm for some time, should receive six months notice.

"The employee is of course entitled to wages he would have earned if he had not been dismissed summarily,'' she said.

Mr. Hankey said a law firm is a business and certain processes have to be followed. Mr. Perinchief was well aware of the firm's policy that time sheets should be turned in on a daily basis.

"There was no personal obligation on Mr. Perinchief to fill out time sheets himself to secure retainers and to ensure bills were rendered,'' he said.

"The primary allegation is that it was Mr. Perinchief's responsibility to see these things were done.''