Andrew Alexander Tees [1994] NSWLST 21

Andrew Alexander Tees [1994] NSWLST 21

The Solicitor was guilty of professional misconduct because he knowingly used false identifying particulars in a verified licence application so as to avoid identification and mislead anyone considering it, and because he issued correspondence on unauthorised manufactured Kheras letterhead while not entitled to practise on his own account, creating a reasonable impression that he was acting on his own account. His admissions, frankness, personal stress, inexperience and the absence of an issue as to fitness to practise justified a modest fine rather than a substantial penalty.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 June 1994
Procedural Posture
Professional Misconduct Disciplinary Complaint / Judgment and Orders
Outcome
The complaints were made out and the Solicitor was found guilty of professional misconduct; a fine and costs order were imposed.
Legal Topics
['professional Misconduct' 'false Particulars in Licence Application' 'unauthorised Letterhead' 'practising Certificate Restrictions' 'solicitor Discipline']
['legal Profession Regulation' 'professional Discipline'] ['professional Misconduct' 'false Particulars in Licence Application' 'unauthorised Letterhead' 'practising Certificate Restrictions' 'solicitor Discipline']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Professional Misconduct Disciplinary Complaint / Judgment and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Solicitor knowingly furnished false particulars and information in an application for a commercial sub-agent's licence under Section 10(1) of the Commercial Agents and Private Enquiry Agents Act 1963." 'Whether the Solicitor issued correspondence during the course of his employment with Kheras The Law Firm on unauthorised letterhead purporting to be used and authorised by that firm.' 'What orders should be made in response to the established professional misconduct.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Solicitor was guilty of professional misconduct because he knowingly used false identifying particulars in a verified licence application so as to avoid identification and mislead anyone considering it, and because he issued correspondence on unauthorised manufactured Kheras letterhead while not entitled to practise on his own account, creating a reasonable impression that he was acting on his own account. His admissions, frankness, personal stress, inexperience and the absence of an issue as to fitness to practise justified a modest fine rather than a substantial penalty.

Court Disposition

The complaints were made out and the Solicitor was found guilty of professional misconduct; a fine and costs order were imposed.

Orders

  • ['The Solicitor be fined $500.' 'The said sum to be paid within 3 months from the date of this Order and that if not paid within that period, the Solicitor be suspended from practice until the said fine is paid.' 'The Solicitor pay the costs of the Society, such costs to be assessed on a solicitor and client basis...