Law Institute v SHP  VCAT 450
A solicitor was found guilty of unsatisfactory conduct in that he failed to supervise his legal and non-legal staff in relation to an undertaking he signed on behalf of his firm. Charged with misconduct, VCAT instead found him guilty of unsatisfactory conduct (which he admitted) and ordered him to pay a fine of $750 and costs of $9,000 stayed for 3 months. It is suggested in the reasons that although the solicitor’s law clerk knew of the undertaking which was simply enough expressed, and although it was accepted that the solicitor told the clerk to bring it to the attention of an employee solicitor handling a related part of the matter who could be expected to have understood the nature of the undertaking, that was not enough.
Lisa Hannon was for the Law Institute, John Langmead and Erin Gardner for the solicitor.
- Previous infractions of same rule not relevant to distinction between professional misconduct and unsatisfactory professional conduct
- Workcover case trust transfer costs solicitor $10,000
- Administrative Decisions Tribunal says Law Society’s penalty submissions too lenient
- Demand for information “within 14 days” complies with s. 149
- And another Court of Appeal sets aside another gross overcharging conviction