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

SA solicitor removed from roll with unresolved disciplinary matters

A retired solicitor with unresolved disciplinary matters before the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal has been removed from the roll of practitioners due to a medical condition that has since made him unfit to practise in the profession. 

user iconDigital 28 September 2021 Big Law
SA solicitor removed from roll with unresolved disciplinary matters
expand image

In 2016, solicitor Janusz Kaminski – who the Supreme Court opted to name given the public interest in the matter – was facing various tribunal proceedings over allegations that he had misappropriated trust monies. In one of those matters, he accepted that the conduct constituted unsatisfactory professional conduct. 

Before an inquiry into these matters could be held and prior to any official findings, Mr Kaminski’s lawyers sought an order to permanently stay the proceedings in 2019 on the basis of medical evidence that demonstrated severe impairment. 

Specifically, Mr Kaminski was suffering from moderately advancing Parkinson’s dementia, described as a progressive disorder possibly associated with concurrent vascular dementia. The Supreme Court found that further deterioration is expected. 

During the latter part of 2019, Mr Kaminski’s solicitors advised the commissioner that he was prepared to consent to his name being struck from the roll of legal practitioners on the basis of the medical evidence. This led to further delays while further medical evidence was obtained to fully demonstrate his consent. 

“A legal practitioner’s name may be struck from the roll for reasons other than proved misconduct. Where a practitioner is suffering from a mental illness or has lost intellectual faculties by reason of age or physical infirmity, it may be appropriate to strike a practitioner’s name from the roll,” the Supreme Court ruled. 

The court added that for as long as Mr Kaminski’s name remains on the roll, he is effectively held out as being fit to practise the profession of law. Although he has since retired, he is still entitled to reapply for a practising certificate. 

“In addition, it is, in our view, undesirable to proceed on a practitioner’s application where there remains unresolved tribunal proceedings,” the court noted.

The entire matter can be read on AustLII and JADE: Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner v Kaminski [2021] SASCFC 39 (21 September 2021)

Tags
You need to be a member to post comments. Become a member for free today!