Charles Edward Austin-Woods [1992] NSWLST 1

The Legal Services Tribunal of New South Wales

CITATION : Charles Edward Austin-Woods [1992] NSWLST 1 PARTIES : Charles Edward Austin-Woods FILE NUMBER(S) : of CORAM: Mr I. Dunlop (Presiding Member) - Mr D Mahon - Mr D Patten CATCHWORDS: Costs - Professional Misconduct - fail to keep client adequately advised - Professional Misconduct - breach of s. 61 of the Legal Profession Act - Professional Misconduct - fail to keep accounts - Professional Misconduct - misappropriate trust moneys/moneys - Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct - delay :- LEGISLATION CITED: Legal Profession Act 1987 CASES CITED: Northern Territory v Maurice and Others (1987) 69 ALR 31 DATES OF HEARING: 21/02/92 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/21/1992 LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:

JUDGMENT:

LEGAL PROFESSION DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF CHARLES EDWARD AUSTIN-WOODS DETERMINATION AND ORDERS

BEFORE: Mr I. Dunlop (Presiding Member) Mr D. Mahon Mr D. Patten

This matter comes before the Tribunal on the complaint of the Law Society of New South Wales ("the Law Society"). The complaint alleges professional misconduct against Charles Edward Austin-Woods ("the Solicitor") based upon 8 separate grounds of complaint, each of which was particularised. In all the complaint related to the affairs of some 23 clients the complaint being pressed as to 22 of those clients at the hearing. In some cases a particular matter was alleged to give rise to more than 1 ground of complaint.

It will be convenient to deal first with allegations of breaches of Section 61(1) of the Legal Profession Act wilful breaches of which constitute statutory professional misconduct by virtue of Section 61(7). It is alleged that the Solicitor committed such breaches in relation to three clients namely, Barrett, Trost and Welsh. In the case of Barrett the Tribunal is satisfied on the evidence that the Solicitor transferred from his trust account to his office account the sum of $383.00 which had been paid to him on account of stamp duty and registration fees by an intending lessee in a lease matter which ultimately did not proceed. The transfer was made without the Solicitor rendering to his client a statement of account and was without authority even if the transfer had been made in respect of costs as maintained by the Solicitor.