Legal Services Commissioner v Maddock [2021] NSWCATOD 46
The Respondent's admitted conduct, in purporting to witness execution of an Enduring Power of Attorney when she had not seen the principal execute it, and in making a false certificate under s 19 of the Powers of Attorney Act 2003 (NSW) when she had not met the principal or explained the instrument to her, was a serious and substantial failure to meet reasonable standards of competence and diligence and was dishonourable conduct unbefitting a legal practitioner. It therefore amounted to professional misconduct under s 297(1)(a) of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW) and at common law. A public reprimand, a $2,500 fine, notification to any future practising certificate authority, and...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 21 April 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Disciplinary Findings and Orders Against an Australian Legal Practitioner / Determined on the Papers After Hearing Was Dispensed With Pursuant to S 144 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (nsw) and S 50(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (nsw)
- Outcome
- The Tribunal found the Respondent guilty of professional misconduct and made protective orders.
- Legal Topics
- ['professional Misconduct' 'false Attestation of Signature' 'enduring Power of Attorney' 'powers of Attorney Act 2003 (nsw) S 19 Certificate' 'instrument of Consent' 'protective Orders' 'reprimand' 'fine' 'costs']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Disciplinary Findings and Orders Against an Australian Legal Practitioner / Determined on the Papers After Hearing Was Dispensed With Pursuant to S 144 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (nsw) and S 50(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (nsw)
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the Respondent's admitted conduct in signing as witness to Ms Fanya Sondakh's purported signature on an Enduring Power of Attorney, when she had not witnessed it, amounted to professional misconduct." "Whether the Respondent's admitted conduct in signing a certificate under s 19 of the Powers of Attorney Act 2003 (NSW), when she had not explained the effect of the Enduring Power of Attorney to Ms Sondakh and had not met her, amounted to professional misconduct." 'Whether the orders proposed by the parties in the Instrument of Consent were appropriate protective orders.']
Ratio Decidendi
The Respondent's admitted conduct, in purporting to witness execution of an Enduring Power of Attorney when she had not seen the principal execute it, and in making a false certificate under s 19 of the Powers of Attorney Act 2003 (NSW) when she had not met the principal or explained the instrument to her, was a serious and substantial failure to meet reasonable standards of competence and diligence and was dishonourable conduct unbefitting a legal practitioner. It therefore amounted to professional misconduct under s 297(1)(a) of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW) and at common law. A public reprimand, a $2,500 fine, notification to any future practising certificate authority, and...
Court Disposition
The Tribunal found the Respondent guilty of professional misconduct and made protective orders.
Orders
- ['The Respondent is publicly reprimanded.' 'The Respondent is to pay a fine of $2,500 within 60 days of the date of this decision.' 'Should the Respondent apply for a practising certificate from either the Law Society of New South Wales or the New South Wales Bar Association (or equivalent interstate regulatory...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment