Legal Services Commissioner v Jackson

CITATION:

Legal Services Commissioner v Jackson [2017] QCAT 207

PARTIES:

Legal Services Commissioner
(Applicant)

v

Amanda Lee Jackson

(Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

OCR120-13

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Justice DG Thomas, President

Assisted by:
Ms Joanne Collins (Legal panel member)

Dr Margaret Steinberg (Lay panel member)

DELIVERED ON:

26 June 2017

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1.    In relation to Charge 1, the Tribunal concludes that the conduct of Ms Jackson amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct.

2.    Charges 2, 3 and 4 are dismissed.

3.    The Legal Services Commissioner must file in the Tribunal and give to Amanda Lee Jackson one (1) copy of any submissions on sanction and costs, by:

4:00pm on 18 July 2017.

4.    Amanda Lee Jackson must file in the Tribunal and give to the Legal Services Commissioner one (1) copy of any submissions on sanction and costs in reply, by:

4:00pm on 8 August 2017.

5.    Unless either of the parties requests an oral hearing before 8 August 2017, the matter will be determined on the papers after 8 August 2017.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE – PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT AND UNSATISFACTORY PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT – SOLICITOR’S COSTS – where applicant alleged respondent overcharged her clients – where previous finding by District Court as to assessment of costs – where retainer agreement did not provide respondent could charge for care and consideration – where respondent charged for work done after termination of the retainer – whether respondent entitled to charge for those costs in the circumstances – whether unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE – PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT AND UNSATISFACTORY PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT – TRUST MONEY – where applicant alleged respondent made trust account disbursements without authority – where respondent referred to trust account authorities in retainer agreement, in separate letter and two handwritten authorities appearing on invoices rendered – whether the words of the trust account authorities authorises the disbursements made – whether the trust account authorities were operative at the time the disbursements were made – whether unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE – PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT AND UNSATISFACTORY PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT – OTHER MATTERS – where applicant alleged respondent failed to maintain reasonable standards of competence and diligence in claiming a lien over the client file which delayed the administration of the estate – where communications between respondent and client’s new law firm – where offer by respondent to release files – where clients new law firm instructed no urgent need for release of files – where respondent outlined concerns to applicant – whether conduct fell below the standard of competence and diligence – whether unsatisfactory conduct or professional misconduct

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE – PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT AND UNSATISFACTORY PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT – OTHER MATTERS – where applicant alleges respondent failed to respond to notice issued under section 443(3) Legal Profession Act