Council of the Law Society of the Act v Legal Practitioner 2

The respondent, a legal practitioner, was the subject of a disciplinary hearing before the Council of the Law Society of the ACT. The Council brought proceedings against the respondent for various allegations of unsatisfactory professional conduct, including failure to respond to correspondence from the Council. The dispute was heard in the Canberra Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the respondent's conduct amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct, and if so, what the appropriate disciplinary action should be. The Tribunal also needed to consider the costs of the proceedings and whether the respondent's name should be published.

The Tribunal found that the respondent's conduct was unsatisfactory professional conduct, as defined by the Legal Profession Act 2006. The Tribunal dismissed several grounds of the application but upheld others, finding that the respondent had failed to respond to correspondence from the Council in a timely manner and had acted in a manner that was discourteous and disrespectful. The Tribunal considered that the respondent's conduct was serious and warranted a private reprimand. The Tribunal also considered the costs of the proceedings, which were substantial, and ordered the respondent to pay the costs over four years. The Tribunal noted that the respondent's conduct had caused significant harm to the reputation of the legal profession and that the reprimand should be private to protect the respondent's privacy while maintaining the integrity of the legal profession.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found that the respondent had engaged in unsatisfactory professional conduct and ordered a private reprimand. The Tribunal also ordered the respondent to pay the costs of the proceedings and prohibited the publication of the respondent's name. The Tribunal emphasised the importance of maintaining the integrity of the legal profession and the need for legal practitioners to act with professionalism and courtesy at all times. The Tribunal vacated the hearing listed for December 2016, as the matter had been resolved.