annotated-1

.pdf

School

The College of Law *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

101

Subject

Law

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

pdf

Pages

Uploaded by JusticeTigerPerson626

File Note 10:00 am Date: 05 July 2023 Start time: End time: 10:12 am Units: 2 Matter: Alice Tay Property Settlement Matter 113654 number: Type of Telephone attendance: Telephone: 08882233679 Office Where: Other: N/A By whom: Sonal Singh Taylor Merdec On whom: Details 1. The interview commenced at 10.00 am. 2. I called Taylor Merdec (played by Farnoosh Shooaeeyan) and introduced myself. I confirmed that I was speaking to Taylor Merdec who represented Hugh Merchant against my client, Alice in a de facto relationship property dispute in the Federal Circuit Court. 3. I explained to Taylor Merdec that my objective for the telephone meeting was to try and resolve the issues regarding the outstanding jointly incurred debt that was to be paid by his client as per the consent orders granted by the Court. I asserted that my client my client transferred her interests in the property at 1/1 Seaside Avenue, Seaside on the good faith that Hugh Merchant would settle the outstanding jointly incurred debts. 4. I explained to Taylor Merdec that A & K Smash Repairs have got a judgment against my client, Alice Tay for the cost of the car repairs and that they can bankrupt her at any point and in the meantime are exercising a lien over the car for the cost of the repairs. I informed Taylor Merdec that my client could lose her job as she needs the car to ravel to work and explained to Taylor Merdec why it was important for my client that this matter gets resolved as soon as possible. Taylor Merdec informed me that had outstanding bills that his client has settled and agreed that the matter needed to be resolved quickly and said that he was willing to help me in any way possible to achieve a resolution that is feasible for all parties involved in the matter. I agreed with Taylor Merdec. 5. I informed Taylor Merdec that my client has advised me that he was good friends with Hugh Merchant. I asked Taylor Merchant whether he has been in contact with Hugh Merchant recently? Taylor Merdec informed to me that he knew Hugh Merchant through a friend and was not himself friends with him and that he was an extremely difficult client to work with. He informed me that once he got to know that the jointed debts remained unpaid after the sale of transfer of the property rights, he sent a letter to Hugh Merchant advising him that the joint debts needed to be settled as soon as possible. He informed me that the letter was returned with a ‘not known at this address marked.’ He told me that he had no idea that the property had been sold or had any reason to suspect that his client would sell the property after the transfer. He told me to that he has $8,000 outstanding in costs and that he has not been able to get in contact with his client. 6. Taylor Merdec then told me that he was in a difficult spot as he was not authorised to give an undertaking and that he did not follow the office protocols in doing so. He said that the principals of his practice are quite displeased with the unpaid costs and that they would not indemnify him if he were found personally liable for the undertaking. He explained that he has four children and quite a few debts and could potentially be bankrupt if he is held personally liable for the file.docx Page 1 of 2 © The College of Law Limited

undertaking. Taylor Merdec said that he can pay $7,000 to resolve the allegations against him although it would place him in significant financial strain. 7. I said that I would need to speak to my client and supervising solicitor regarding the offer 0f $7,000 and seek further instructions from the client. I also asked Taylor Merdec if he could get in contact with his friend that referred Hugh Merchant to him and try to track down Hugh Merchant. He agreed that he would do that. 8. We both agreed that no complaints would be made to the Law Society until we have both undertaken the actions listed below. We both agreed to schedule another meeting in 3 days’ time discuss what further actions needed to b taken. 9. The meeting ended at 10.12 am. Next steps: Speak to Alice Tay supervising solicitor regarding Taylor Merdec’s offer to pay $7,000. Speak to friend of Hugh Merchant to find out his location and reach out to him about settling his outstanding debts. By whom: Sonal Singh Taylor Merdec

Question to the common facts 1. Has Merdec given an undertaking personally binding on him? It is probably likely that he has given a personal undertaking. The wording in the email states ‘on behalf of our client’. The general approach is that such words illustrate an acceptance of personal responsibility sufficiently clear ( Law Society of New South Wales v Hinde [2005] NSWADT 199). 2. Assuming the undertaking is personally binding on him but he does not pay the debts listed in order 1 so as to obtain payment receipts, will he be guilty of professional misconduct or unsatisfactory professional conduct as those terms are defined in the applicable legal profession legislation? Rule 6.1 provides that ‘ A legal practitioner who has given an undertaking in the course of legal practice must honour that undertaking and ensure the timely and effective performance of the undertaking, unless released by the recipient or by a court of competent jurisdiction. Any breach of the SALPCR is capable of constituting either unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct: see r 2.3; LPA s 70. 3. Would Singh’s email be regarded as offensive, discourteous or otherwise in breach of the applicable professional conduct rules? For solicitors, there is a fundamental ethical duty to be honest and courteous in all dealings in the course of legal practice: SALPCR r 4.1.2. Here Singh in his email made a baseless accusation that Merdec and Merchant had colluded and conspired together which was not courteous and a breach of this rule. 4. Is Singh’s reference in the email to making a complaint accurate? To whom should complaints be made? Generally, lawyers (whether barristers or solicitors) are obliged to report substandard conduct on the part of other lawyers, however in South Australia this appears to be limited to conduct believed to be in breach of a lawyer’s trust account responsibilities. A complaint about a lawyer (solicitor or barrister) should initially be made to the Commissioner. A complaint must be made to the Commissioner within 3 years of the conduct that is the subject of the complaint or such longer period as the Commissioner may allow: s 77B of the LPA. A lawyer’s conduct that falls within the definitions of unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct may lead the Commissioner to make any one or more of the orders specified in LPA s 77J. 5. If there was a formal complaint in relation to Merdec’s conduct couldn’t Merdec just ignore it? If there was a formal complaint that was made in relation to Merdec, Failure to comply may constitute unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct: s 70 of the LPA so Merdec cannot simply ignore it. 5. What does the reference to seeking “relief against [Merdec] in the Supreme Court in relation to the undertaking” mean? The Supreme Court has an inherent jurisdiction to hear matters concerning discipline of persons admitted to practice and has the power to remove a practitioner’s name off the roll. 6. If a lawyer holding a practising certificate becomes bankrupt does the lawyer have to notify anyone of the bankruptcy? Will that lawyer be able to continue practising?

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help