You have4 free articles left this month.
Register for a free account to access unlimited free content.
You have 4 free articles left this month.
Register for a free account to access unlimited free content.

Lawyers Weekly - legal news for Australian lawyers

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
lawyers weekly logo

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA

Goodbye job applications, hello dream career
Seize control of your career and design the future you deserve with LW career

NSW lawyer awaits discipline after unsatisfactory professional conduct finding

A solicitor alleged to have misled the NSW Land and Property Information service is yet to hear disciplinary orders after the Civil and Administrative Tribunal found that it amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct, despite it not being intentional. 

user iconNaomi Neilson 08 July 2021 Big Law
NCAT
expand image

The Council of the NSW Law Society was unsuccessful in pursuing a professional misconduct finding, but the state’s Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) did find solicitor Jim Kekatos guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct for lodging a caveat removal request for a property despite the unrelated attached orders. 

In August 2020, the Law Society council alleged that Mr Kekatos misled the NSW Land and Property Information (LPI) when requesting the removal of two caveats registered on a property located in the Greater Sydney suburb Green Valley. He attached a judgement made on 7 August 2015 that did not relate to the property, but the caveats were still removed from the registrar a month later. 

The Law Society alleged that the August orders related to other caveats not relating to the two in the request and that when Mr Kekatos lodged the caveat removal request, “he knew or ought to have known the orders did not refer or relate”. The council accused him of acting “deliberately or recklessly” over this period. 

However, NCAT disagreed: “The Tribunal came to the view, on the evidence before it, that it cannot be comfortably satisfied… that Mr Kekatos acted intentionally or recklessly in relation to lodging the caveat removal request.” 

In his reply, Mr Kekatos admitted to the matters but, while conceding the wording may have been potentially misleading, said that it was not intentional. His position remained that he had made a mistake and, from the first moment he was made aware of it, continued to always admit that he had made an error in the request. 

Overall, the Tribunal found that Mr Kekatos’ evidence was honest and open and that while he conceded to act incompetently, at no stage was it with intent to mislead. NCAT also took into consideration that it was a “one-off occurrence”. 

“Nevertheless, Mr Kekatos’ conduct in relation to the caveat removal request falls short of the standard of competence or diligence that a member of the public is entitled to expect from a reasonably competent lawyer, and it was appropriate for him to have made that admission,” the NCAT judgement read. 

The entire judgement can be found on AustLII: Council of the Law Society of New South Wales v Kekatos [2021] NSWCATOD 90 (2 July 2021). 

Naomi Neilson

Naomi Neilson

Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly. 

You can email Naomi at: naomi.neilson@momentummedia.com.au

Comments (9)
  • Avatar

    I am the victim of a solicitor who altered a document to mislead the Ct. Anyone who does this should be swiftly dispatched from the profession.
    0
  • Avatar
    :lol:
    0
  • Avatar
    I support the practitioner here who has no doubt been put through an awful lot of stress over years and an awful lot of money being taken to the tribunal by the NSW Law Society only for the Law Society's prosecution and allegations not to stack up. The Law Society could have dealt with this itself years ago. There was never the evidence to support this prosecution or a finding of professional misconduct.
    3
  • Avatar
    so, any solicitor who now makes a mistake is "incompetent"...

    no wonder people are leaving in droves...

    2
  • Avatar
    Am I ever going to read a decision where the Law Society as prosecutor actually made out its allegations. Where was the evidence to support the Law Society's allegations?
    4
  • Avatar
    “deliberately or recklessly”
    4
  • Avatar
    Another stellar decision by the professional conduct committee up at the Law Society to refer to the tribunal rather than deal with the admitted conduct (which is what the tribunal found) justly, quickly and cheaply and how a model litigant should via s299 of the Uniform Law. Unsuccessful campaign in the tribunal by the Law Society all on public funds.
    4
  • Avatar
    I would like to hear thoughts from readers on this point.
    Instead of the law society filing an application in the NCAT once it investigates a complaint and makes its finding against a solicitor could it not make a decision and leave it up to the solicitor to pursue an appeal through NCAT. Isn’t NCAT sufficiently capable of making its own mind re any allegation. Does the NCAT need the law society to be a party to any such appeal proceedings. If the law society is not a party to a proceeding wouldn’t that give the solicitor a fair chance of not being struck off. As much as the law society may be obliged to protect consumers and investigate complaints ought it not to consider its members and give such solicitors a fair go of not being subjected to harsh penalties.
    2
    • Avatar
      Anonymous: the Law Society of NSW (via its PCC - professional conduct committee which includes Council members) has the power to make a finding of unsatisfactory professional conduct and issue a reprimand (and/or other penalties including fine, education course, conditions) per s299 of the Uniform Law without referral to the tribunal. This would save significant public funds being wasted on matter after matter where the Law Society does not succeed on the allegations it propounds. As you point out it would then be up to the practitoner to appeal to NCAT if they so decided.
      4
Avatar
Attach images by dragging & dropping or by selecting them.
The maximum file size for uploads is MB. Only files are allowed.
 
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
Posting as
You need to be a member to post comments. Become a member for free today!