Which principle applies to the withdrawal of representation by a lawyer in cases of conflict of interest?

The principle that applies to the withdrawal of representation by a lawyer in cases of conflict of interest is rooted in ethical obligations and professional responsibilities. Mandatory withdrawal is required when a lawyer identifies a conflict of interest that impairs their ability to act in the best interests of their client or when their continued representation could lead to breaches of professional conduct standards.

In situations where a conflict of interest arises, it can compromise the integrity of the legal representation and the lawyer's professional responsibilities. For instance, if a lawyer previously represented a client and then encounters a scenario that involves an opposing party who was also previously represented, continuing representation could put confidences at risk or result in divided loyalties. The duty to uphold the ethical standards and protect the interests of all affected parties necessitates that the lawyer withdraw to maintain professional duty and integrity.

This principle underscores the importance of trust in the attorney-client relationship and the lawyer's obligation to maintain fidelity to each client's interests without compromising them due to conflicting obligations. Thus, the necessity for mandatory withdrawal in the face of a conflict of interest reflects adherence to these fundamental ethical practices.