Disciplinary Register

The Register of Disciplinary Action contains information about lawyers who have been disciplined.

Disciplinary action may be taken by the Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner, the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal, the Supreme Court or in some cases, by their interstate equivalents.

Below you can search the Register by lawyer’s name and/or the disciplinary action taken, or view the entire Register.

A finding of Professional Misconduct, whether made by the Commissioner, the Tribunal or the Supreme Court, must be published on the Register.

A less serious finding of Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct may be included on the Register, at the discretion of the Commissioner.

Not all lawyers subject to disciplinary action prior to 1 July 2014 are listed on the Register. Only lawyers who have been struck-off (ie removed from practice), suspended from practice or placed under supervision for a period of time (and which is still in effect as at 1 July 2014) are on the Register. Some information isn't on the Register for older disciplinary actions.

Lawyers found guilty of misconduct in other jurisdictions may have their details published on an interstate disciplinary action register.

If a finding that is entered on the Register is appealed, then the fact of the appeal will also be noted on the Register. If the appeal, or indeed any review:

results in the finding being quashed, then any reference to that disciplinary action must be removed from the Register;
results in the finding being otherwise varied, then the Register will be amended appropriately.

The Act and the Regulations were amended as from 30 July 2017 so that, in some cases, the Commissioner now has the discretion to remove information that he had previously included on the Register. However, he can only do so where the information relates to relatively minor misconduct, and only if it has been at least 2 years since the later of:

the inclusion of the information on the Register; and
the fulfilment of the order or requirement to which the information relates.

Disclaimer: The Commissioner is required to maintain the Register of Disciplinary Action in accordance with the Act, Section 89C. While all reasonable care is taken to make sure the information on the Register is correct and up-to-date, the Commissioner is not liable for any loss or damage that may result from reliance on the Register or from any error or deficiency in the Register. The Commissioner also has certain specific protections from liability under section 89F of the Act.

Lawyer name

Date of decision	Full name	Decision	Disciplinary action taken
2022	William Chau	Professional Misconduct	Multiple Disciplinary Action
Full name William Chau Business address * Suite 817, 147 Pirie Street ADELAIDE SA 5000 Date(s) of admission 14 April 2009 Jurisdiction(s) of admission South Australia Home jurisdiction * South Australia Substance of Conduct Matter Failure to deposit substantial amounts of trust money into a trust account Decision Professional Misconduct Date of decision 28 June 2022 Disciplinary action taken Multiple Disciplinary Action Conditions on Practising Certificate Fine Reprimand Undertake training, education or counselling Notes Fine of $9,000 to be paid in instalments over 24 months. Additional units of Mandatory Continuing Professional Education to be 3 units of training in trust accounting. Regulatory authority Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner Appeal Decision or order Decision not published
2022	Stephen Patrick McNamara	The Practitioner’s name be struck off the Roll of Legal Practitioners.	Name removed from Roll of Legal Practitioners
Full name Stephen Patrick McNamara Business address * C/- Department for Correctional Services Date(s) of admission 07 February 1978 Jurisdiction(s) of admission South Australia Home jurisdiction * South Australia Substance of Conduct Matter Found guilty of a serious offence Decision The Practitioner’s name be struck off the Roll of Legal Practitioners. Date of decision 10 March 2022 Disciplinary action taken Name removed from Roll of Legal Practitioners Struck off Notes Regulatory authority Supreme Court Appeal Decision or order Link to published decision
2022	Ms Christie Lee Rigg	Professional Misconduct	Multiple Disciplinary Action
Full name Ms Christie Lee Rigg Business address * Level 3, 169 Fullarton Road DULWICH SA 5065 Date(s) of admission 21 September 2015 Jurisdiction(s) of admission South Australia Home jurisdiction * South Australia Substance of Conduct Matter Lack of progress and communication regarding a deceased estate, failure to refund filing fee paid once instructions terminated. Decision Professional Misconduct Date of decision 08 March 2022 Disciplinary action taken Multiple Disciplinary Action Fine Make a payment Order to apologise Refrain from doing something Reprimand Notes Practitioner is to refrain from charging for any work done and is to refund the filing fee paid by the Complainant Executor. Additional Comments or instructions: The amount of the fine is $2 500.00. Regulatory authority Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner Appeal Decision or order Decision not published
2021	David Luke Williams	Professional Misconduct	Multiple Disciplinary Action
Full name David Luke Williams Business address * 125 Lipson Street PORT ADELAIDE SA 5015 Date(s) of admission 11 October 2004 Jurisdiction(s) of admission South Australia Home jurisdiction * South Australia Substance of Conduct Matter The Practitioner’s practising certificate expired on 30 June 2015. It has not been renewed since that time. The Practitioner admitted to having knowingly appeared for a client in the Magistrates Court and the District Court on 5 separate occasions between 21July 2015 and 4 November 2015 when he was not the holder of a practising certificate. By virtue of not holding a current practising certificate, the Practitioner also did not hold professional indemnity insurance for the relevant period. The Practitioner’s conduct was in breach of section 21 of the Legal Practitioner’s Act, 1981 which provides that a person must not practise the profession of the law, or hold himself or herself out as being entitled to practise the profession of the law, unless the person holds a practising certificate. Decision Professional Misconduct Date of decision 22 December 2021 Disciplinary action taken Multiple Disciplinary Action Refrain from doing something Reprimand Notes The Practitioner was reprimanded and ordered to refrain from making any application for a practising certificate in any jurisdiction for a period of 4 months from the date of the Commissioner’s Determination. Regulatory authority Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner Appeal Decision or order Decision not published
2021	Andrew Robert Graham	Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct	Multiple Disciplinary Action
Full name Andrew Robert Graham Business address * Suite 5, Level 1 118 Halifax Street ADELAIDE SA 5000 Date(s) of admission 14 December 2009 Jurisdiction(s) of admission South Australia Home jurisdiction * South Australia Substance of Conduct Matter Practitioner pleaded guilty to offences of administering a controlled drug to another (section 33I(1)(a) Controlled Substances Act 1984) and attempting to pervert the course of justice (section 256(1) Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935). He was convicted and placed on a bond to be of good behaviour for a period of 12 months. Breach of Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules 5.1.1 and 5.1.2, by engaging in conduct which to a material degree diminished the public confidence in the administration of justice and brought the profession into disrepute. Decision Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct Date of decision 01 December 2021 Disciplinary action taken Multiple Disciplinary Action Reprimand Supervision Notes Terms of the supervision: 1. the Practitioner practise only as an employed solicitor under the supervision of a legal practitioner of not less than 15 years post admission experience, the period of supervision to conclude on 5 December 2022; 2. during the period of supervision, the Practitioner procure written reports from his supervisor to be provided to the Commissioner on a quarterly basis regarding the Practitioner’s cooperation with the supervision, the management of the Practitioner’s client matters, and any aspect of the Practitioner’s personal conduct that impacts, or may impact, on his ability to practise. The disciplinary proceedings ran in parallel to section 20AH Show Cause Proceedings in the Supreme Court. In those proceedings the Practitioner undertook not to engage in legal practice whilst the proceedings were on foot; the Practitioner was effectively suspended from legal practice for a period of four months. On 4 December 2020 the Supreme Court imposed conditions on the Practitioner’s practising certificate, including that: 1. for a period of two years the Practitioner practise only as an employed solicitor under the supervision of a legal practitioner of not less than 15 years post admission experience; 2. during the period of the supervision the Practitioner procure a written report from his supervisor on a quarterly basis; 3. for a period of one year the Practitioner submit to drug and/or alcohol testing at the reasonable direction of the Commissioner; 4. for a period of one year from the date of the Order the Practitioner comply with any treatment plan recommended by his treating psychologist and provide or report from the treating psychologist, such report to be provided not less than once every 3 months. In determining what disciplinary action he should take, the Commissioner took into account the conditions imposed on the Practitioner’s practising certificate by the Supreme Court. The Commissioner indicated that, but for the 4 month effective suspension of the Practitioner’s practising certificate, he would most likely have suspended the Practitioner’s practising certificate for 8-10 weeks. He also indicated that, but for the order requiring the Practitioner to comply with any treatment plan recommended by his treating psychologist, he would most likely have made orders the Practitioner submit to medical examination, counselling and/or supervised treatment. Regulatory authority Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner Appeal Decision or order Decision not published