On The (Northern) Beaches

The  Council of the Law Society of New South Wales has removed an attorney from its rolls for misappropriation. 

The respondent conceded that he was guilty of 67 complaints which had been brought against him by the applicant which we summarise as follows;

18 complaints of misappropriation from his trust account totalling $2,025,134.32

Plea for privacy rejected 

In determining the application made by the respondent we have primary regard to the nature of these proceedings. These are disciplinary proceedings based on professional misconduct of a most egregious kind. Legal practitioners play an integral part in the administration of justice and in the interrelationship of members of the community at all levels and under most circumstances of human and legal entity endeavours. The retention of lawyers is a desirable, if not necessary, function of the ever increasing pervasive influence of the law on social and commercial activities. In the circumstances it is essential that all legal practitioners conduct themselves appropriately at all times. A failure to do so will impact adversely on the reputation of the profession, and the confidence which the community must have in their legal representatives.

Accordingly, any misconduct of a legal practitioner whether it constitutes unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct is a serious matter. The community is entitled to be made aware of that misconduct for its own protection. Other legal practitioners must be aware of that misconduct in circumstances where they may have had prior dealings with that legal practitioner, and to provide a salutary deterrent effect against any temptation on their part to engage in misconduct. This provides a powerful argument in support of the principle of open justice as it applies to the publication of the fact of these proceedings, and to the publication of our reasons.

Any legal practitioner who engages in misconduct must be aware that when he or she is caught out, there will be adverse consequences for his or her reputation by reason of the publication of that misconduct inter-alia in decisions of this Tribunal. Whilst we have sympathy for the respondent’s personal circumstances, including the adverse impact on his family situation, this has all been brought about by his misconduct. There is no point in blaming the applicant for having exposed his misconduct in a public manner, and there is no point in decrying the adverse effect of any publicity through publication of our decision including our reasons. The respondent is the author of his own misfortune. It is necessary that the applicant has had to publicise the respondent’s misconduct and advise persons affected by it as to their rights.

We now come to consider the matters raised by the respondent concerning the impact of the publication of our decision and reasons on his wife and children, and the possible adverse consequences upon his employment. There is no suggestion in any of the evidentiary material before us of any involvement in any of the respondent’s misconduct by any member of his family. There is simply no reason why the interests of open justice would be served by making any reference to any member of the respondent’s family, or his current employer by name or in any manner which is intended to identify them, except by reference to the respondent’s name.

Whilst we appreciate that if there is any publicity surrounding the publication of this decision and our reasons that it may have adverse consequences for the respondent’s family members, we observe that on the evidence of the respondent they were aware of his circumstances since 2013, and they have had a period of 5 years in which to deal with them. There is no evidence that any family member is likely to suffer any catastrophic or otherwise serious consequence on the publication of the respondent’s name in these proceedings.

In all the circumstances the principles of open justice dictate that it is appropriate to publish the name of the respondent as a party to these proceedings, and to this extent we reject the respondent’s application.

MSM.com 9 News reported

A Sydney solicitor has been charged with 43 fraud offences after allegedly misappropriating $1.5 million from his clients on the Northern Beaches.

Luke Adamson, 55, was arrested at Parramatta Police station yesterday following an extensive investigation by detectives.

Police had established Strike Force Moonmerri to investigate the solicitor, suspected of misappropriating client’s funds held in a trust account between 2009 and 2013.

Leaving Parramatta Police station last night the man was granted strict conditional bail and is due to appear in Parramatta Local Court in late January.

(Mike Frisch)