Legal Services Commissioner v Slipper

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Legal Services Commissioner v Slipper [2019] QCAT 169

PARTIES:

LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSIONER
(applicant)

v

ROBIN JOHN SLIPPER (No 2)

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

OCR 110-14

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

DELIVERED ON:

1 July 2019

HEARING DATE:

22-23 August 2018

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Hon Peter Lyons QC, Judicial Member

Assisted by:
Ms Megan Mahon
Dr Margaret Steinberg AM

ORDERS:

1. The Tribunal recommends that the respondent’s name be removed from the local roll.

2. The respondent is to pay the applicant’s costs of and incidental to the application, to be assessed on the standard basis.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE – PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT AND UNSATISFACTORY PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT – where the Tribunal found that in five of the matters to which the discipline application relates the respondent placed himself in a position of conflict and then engaged in rapacious conduct – where the Tribunal found that the conduct in each of those five matters was professional misconduct – where the Tribunal also found that the respondent took estate moneys to which he was not entitled and demonstrated gross incompetence – where the parties were granted the opportunity to make submissions on the Tribunal’s proposed orders upon these findings but did not do so – determination of final orders against respondent

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

Applicant:

G R Rice QC, instructed by Legal Services Commission

Respondent:

B T Cohen, solicitor of Bartley Cohen

The findings made in this matter are recorded in earlier reasons.[1] The parties were given the opportunity to make submissions about the orders proposed by the Tribunal, but have made no submissions about them. Accordingly, the following orders are made:-
[1]Legal Services Commissioner v Slipper [2019] QCAT 146.
1.The Tribunal recommends that the respondent’s name be removed from the local roll.
2.The respondent is to pay the applicant’s costs of and incidental to the application, to be assessed on the standard basis.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Legal Services Commissioner v Slipper, the central issue before the Tribunal was the professional misconduct and unsatisfactory professional conduct of the respondent. The Tribunal had to determine whether the findings of misconduct and conflict of interest were substantiated and, if so, what orders should be made. The Tribunal concluded that the respondent had engaged in conduct that amounted to professional misconduct in five specific matters, including placing himself in a conflict of interest and engaging in rapacious behaviour. Furthermore, the Tribunal found that the respondent had misappropriated estate funds and demonstrated gross incompetence. The parties were given an opportunity to make submissions on the proposed orders, but neither party chose to do so.

The Tribunal considered the severity and frequency of the misconduct, which included significant breaches of ethical standards and fiduciary duties. The findings of professional misconduct were based on clear evidence of the respondent’s actions, which demonstrated a disregard for the professional obligations expected of a legal practitioner. The Tribunal’s decision was influenced by the respondent’s repeated failure to act in the best interests of his clients and his misuse of client funds. The Tribunal concluded that these actions warranted severe disciplinary measures.

In light of these findings, the Tribunal recommended that the respondent’s name be removed from the local roll, effectively disbarring him from practicing law in Australia. Additionally, the respondent was ordered to pay the Legal Services Commissioner’s costs of and incidental to the application, to be assessed on the standard basis. This decision underscores the importance of maintaining high ethical standards within the legal profession and the Tribunal’s commitment to enforcing these standards through appropriate disciplinary action.

Orders of the court

1. The Tribunal recommends that the respondent’s name be removed from the local roll.

2. The respondent is to pay the applicant’s costs of and incidental to the application, to be assessed on the standard basis.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

CITATION:	Legal Services Commissioner v Slipper [2019] QCAT 169
PARTIES:	LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSIONER (applicant)
v
ROBIN JOHN SLIPPER (No 2) (respondent)
APPLICATION NO/S:	OCR 110-14
MATTER TYPE:	Occupational regulation matters
DELIVERED ON:	1 July 2019
HEARING DATE:	22-23 August 2018
HEARD AT:	Brisbane
DECISION OF:	Hon Peter Lyons QC, Judicial Member Assisted by: Ms Megan Mahon Dr Margaret Steinberg AM
ORDERS:	1. The Tribunal recommends that the respondent’s name be removed from the local roll. 2. The respondent is to pay the applicant’s costs of and incidental to the application, to be assessed on the standard basis.
CATCHWORDS:	PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE – PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT AND UNSATISFACTORY PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT – where the Tribunal found that in five of the matters to which the discipline application relates the respondent placed himself in a position of conflict and then engaged in rapacious conduct – where the Tribunal found that the conduct in each of those five matters was professional misconduct – where the Tribunal also found that the respondent took estate moneys to which he was not entitled and demonstrated gross incompetence – where the parties were granted the opportunity to make submissions on the Tribunal’s proposed orders upon these findings but did not do so – determination of final orders against respondent
APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:	G R Rice QC, instructed by Legal Services Commission
Respondent:	B T Cohen, solicitor of Bartley Cohen