Legal Services Commissioner v Johnston

In the matter of Legal Services Commissioner v Johnston, the Legal Services Commissioner brought a disciplinary action against Suzanne Machelle Johnston, a practicing solicitor in Queensland. The application included eleven charges, including breaches of competence and diligence, trust account breaches, and failure to respond to notices under the Legal Profession Act 2007. The respondent did not appear in court, leading to her being found guilty of all charges. The court had to determine whether the respondent's conduct demonstrated unfitness to practice, warranting her removal from the local roll, and whether she should pay the Commissioner's costs.

The court was tasked with assessing whether the respondent's actions constituted unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct under the Legal Profession Act. The charges related to the respondent's competence and diligence, her failure to respond to notices, and her breaches of trust account management. The court considered the respondent's absence and the severity of the charges to determine her fitness to continue practicing law. Additionally, the court had to decide on the appropriate disciplinary measures, including the possibility of removing the respondent from the roll of practitioners and ordering her to pay costs.

The court found that the respondent's conduct demonstrated unfitness to practice law. The charges of unsatisfactory professional conduct and professional misconduct were substantiated by the evidence presented. The respondent's failure to maintain competence and diligence, her non-compliance with notices, and her breaches of trust account management all contributed to the court's decision. Consequently, the court ordered the removal of Suzanne Machelle Johnston from the roll of practitioners and mandated her to pay the Commissioner's costs, to be assessed on the Supreme Court scale.

In summary, the court's decision was that Suzanne Machelle Johnston's conduct warranted her removal from the legal profession. The severity of her breaches, including failing to maintain competence, non-compliance with notices, and trust account breaches, led to the conclusion that she was unfit to practice law. The court ordered her removal from the roll of practitioners and directed her to pay the Commissioner's costs.