Legal Services Commissioner v Boundy

CITATION:

Legal Services Commissioner v Boundy [2018] QCAT 55

PARTIES:

Legal Services Commissioner
(Applicant)

v

Richard Alexander Boundy

(Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

OCR242-16

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

HEARING DATE:

6 March 2018

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Justice Daubney, President
Assisted by:
Ms Megan Mahon

Dr Margaret Steinberg

DELIVERED ON:

6 March 2018

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1.     The respondent is publicly reprimanded

2.     The respondent is to pay a fine in the sum of $1,000

3.     The respondent shall pay the applicant’s costs, to be assessed on a standard basis on the Supreme Court scale under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules, such costs to be assessed as if the matter were proceeding before the Supreme Court of Queensland.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE – PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT OR UNSATISFACTORY PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT – NEGLECT AND DELAY – where the respondent failed to maintain reasonable standards of competence and diligence – where the respondent caused delay in administration of an estate – where the respondent caused delay in obtaining probate – where the respondent caused delay in executing a deed of settlement – where the respondent was asked to provide an itemised account – where the respondent failed to provide an itemised account within 28 days – where the respondent provides evidence of personal issues – whether the respondent should be publically reprimanded – whether a pecuniary sanction should be imposed

Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) s 332(2)

APPEARANCES AND REPRESENTATION:

APPLICANT:

Ms D A Holliday instructed by the Legal Services Commissioner

RESPONDENT:

B T Cohen of Bartley Cohen

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. The respondent, Richard Alexander Boundy, was admitted as a solicitor in 1992.  He commenced sole practice at Anderson Solicitors on about 3 July 1995 and has been practicing as the sole principal of that firm ever since.  As at late 2005 his predominant areas of practice were family law, succession law (including drafting wills and enduring powers of attorney) and conveyancing. 

2. By the present proceeding brought by the Legal Services Commissioner the respondent faces two charges which have been filed under the Legal Profession Act 2007. The charges are that between 18 November 2005 and 31 March 2015 the respondent failed to maintain reasonable standards of competence and diligence whilst acting for his client, Sonya McLeod Patterson, and that on or about 19 August 2013 the respondent failed to provide an itemised bill to his client, Sonya McLeod Patterson, in contravention of section 332(2) of the Legal Profession Act 2007.

3. The parties have filed a statement of agreed facts.  The underlying factual matrix in this matter is not in issue.  The applicant and the respondent have also filed comprehensive written outlines of submissions.  It is notable that the charges are, in effect, not contested by the respondent. 

4. The respondent has put before the tribunal material which, whilst not exculpatory, nevertheless provides context and explanation for the circumstances which gave rise to the charges which are now before the tribunal, and we will refer…