A Tasmanian lawyer who wrote letters including an offer to settle a matrimonial property dispute if family violence complaints against his client were withdrawn was guilty of unprofessional conduct, a judge has found.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Supreme Court Justice Gregory Geason ordered legal ethics training for the lawyer.
Justice Geason said the lawyer's failure to "understand the true nature and effect of his conduct" persuaded him there was merit in requiring him to undertake and complete a course in legal ethics and professional responsibilities.
The judge made that order, and also ordered a reprimand.
Justice Geason said he did not consider a fine to be necessary.
The Legal Profession Board of Tasmania submitted to the court the lawyer's conduct fell short of "the standard of competence and diligence a member of the public was entitled to reasonably expect from a competent lawyer" and that the failure was substantial.
The board sought a declaration the lawyer was guilty of professional misconduct.
That would have needed the court to be satisfied the lawyer was not a fit and proper person to practise law.
Justice Geason said he was not satisfied the lawyer was guilty of professional misconduct.
In his judgment, Justice Geason said the board received a complaint from the lawyer's client's former wife.
She had complained to police the client had assaulted her and she had taken out a police family violence order against him.
The client was charged in February 2018 with two counts of common assault against the woman.
Justice Geason said the client wrote to the woman, via the lawyer, offering to settle their matrimonial property dispute on terms including that "all legal pursuits and accusations cease, including Tas. Police".
In March 2018, the client was charged with a count of perverting justice.
The lawyer represented the client on that matter in the Burnie Magistrates Court.
Justice Geason said the lawyer wrote to the complainant's solicitor in April and May 2018 conveying an offer to settle the property dispute, conditional on withdrawal of the complaints to police.
At the time of the letters, the lawyer knew his client had been charged with perverting justice, the judge said.
In his response to the board, the lawyer said the offer "being conditioned" meant the charges were to be dropped by the woman, which they ultimately were.
"I was bound by my instructions (from the client) and, at no time, was I made aware that those instructions were not true," the lawyer said.
"My client asserted that the allegations were false and it was his right to make complaint (or not) to police to that effect.
IN OTHER NEWS
"The offer was based precisely on this state of affairs.
"The offer asserted that the allegations were false and vexatious.
"The offers were not made to pervert the course of justice.
"Viewed in their proper context, they were merely terms offered to the other party to desist from false allegations as part of an overall settlement of the dispute."
Justice Geason said: "Though it is not relevant to the matter before me, the charge of perverting the course of justice against the respondent's client was not proceeded with and the family violence charges against him were dismissed or discontinued."
Sean Ford
The Advocate Newspaper, Tasmania. Business, economics, politics, crime.
The Advocate Newspaper, Tasmania. Business, economics, politics, crime.
