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
2021	Kieren Francis Moore	Unprofessional Conduct & Professional Misconduct	Recommend that proceedings be commenced in the Supreme Court
Full name Kieren Francis Moore Business address * 4 Purbrick Street, Wynn Vale, SA 5127 Date(s) of admission 08 October 2002 Jurisdiction(s) of admission South Australia Home jurisdiction * South Australia Substance of Conduct Matter (1) Failure to deposit trust money into a trust account; intermixing of trust money with other money; misappropriation of trust money; failure to keep trust records; failure to account to client for trust money; permitting cash withdrawals of trust money; failure to maintain a trust ledger; failure to issue trust receipts and trust account statements (Cassoudakis charge) (2)Delay and failure to act on instructions in Estate matter (Lucia Charge); Decision Unprofessional Conduct & Professional Misconduct Date of decision 14 January 2021 Disciplinary action taken Recommend that proceedings be commenced in the Supreme Court Notes Regulatory authority Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal Appeal Decision or order Link to published decision , Link to published decision
2020	Jennifer Ann Hirst	Finding of professional misconduct pursuant to section 77J(2)	Multiple Disciplinary Action
Full name Jennifer Ann Hirst Business address * 3/345 King William Street ADELAIDE 5000 Date(s) of admission 27 August 2012 Jurisdiction(s) of admission South Australia Home jurisdiction * South Australia Substance of Conduct Matter (i) The Practitioner was ordered by a court to prepare a joint letter between the parties to family law proceedings in order to arrange a joint valuation of property. (ii) The Practitioner represented a client husband in the family law proceedings. During the course of those family law proceedings the Practitioner prepared a back dated letter which she sent to the practitioner representing the wife in the family law proceedings. The backdated letter made misrepresentations to the wife’s practitioner. The Practitioner prepared the backdated letter as she preferred her own interests to that of her client’s. (iii) The Practitioner employed a practitioner (the employee) who held a restricted practising certificate. The Practitioner failed to properly supervise this practitioner. (iv) The Practitioner in her back dated letter to the wife’s practitioner blamed her employee for failing to prepare the letter in time. (v) The Practitioner knowingly made false statements in her back dated letter to the wife’s practitioner. (vi) The Practitioner failed to fully inform her client. Decision Finding of professional misconduct pursuant to section 77J(2) Date of decision 03 December 2020 Disciplinary action taken Multiple Disciplinary Action Conditions on Practising Certificate Fine Order to apologise Reprimand Undertake training, education or counselling Notes 1. Fine of $10,000, to be paid in 10 consecutive monthly instalments of $1,000 each. 2. Certain education and training to be completed by 31 March 2021. 3. The Practitioner must not employ a legal practitioner holding a restricted practising certificate until such time as she completes that education and training. Regulatory authority Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner Appeal Decision or order Decision not published
2020	Amanda Louise Gregory	Professional Misconduct	Multiple Disciplinary Action
Full name Amanda Louise Gregory Business address * 9 King William Road UNLEY SA 5061 Date(s) of admission 06 April 1999 Jurisdiction(s) of admission South Australia Home jurisdiction * South Australia Substance of Conduct Matter In relation to the administration of a deceased estate of which she was the sole executor, the Practitioner: • failed to maintain an adequate record of the instructions of the testator; • inappropriately charged to the estate, without proper entitlement and/or authority, her professional fees and certain expenses to personally travel overseas to deliver the ashes of the deceased to his country of birth; and • (by reason of that inappropriate charging) breached the fiduciary obligations she owed to the estate as solicitor/executor to act in the best interest of the estate. Decision Professional Misconduct Date of decision 18 November 2020 Disciplinary action taken Multiple Disciplinary Action Conditions on Practising Certificate Make a payment Reprimand Notes The Commissioner ordered the Practitioner to: • undertake 3 specific units of professional development; and • repay $10,000 to the residuary beneficiaries of the deceased estate. The Practitioner has also given undertakings that restrict, for a period of 3 years, the type of work the Practitioner can undertake as an executor. Regulatory authority Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner Appeal Decision or order Decision not published
2020	Benjamin Johns	Practitioner admitted	Struck off and Re-admitted
Full name Benjamin Johns Business address * 18 Victor Avenue, Woodville West SA 5008 Date(s) of admission 12 October 2020, 11 February 2002 Jurisdiction(s) of admission South Australia Home jurisdiction * South Australia Substance of Conduct Matter Falsifying a document (Application for Warrant) Decision Practitioner admitted Date of decision 12 October 2020 Disciplinary action taken Struck off and Re-admitted Notes Re-admitted subject to conditions: 1. Applicant subject to a period of supervised practice for five years; and 2. In the period of supervised practice the Applicant disclose the circumstances of his removal from the Roll of practitioners and subsequent re-admission to all of his employers. Regulatory authority Supreme Court Appeal Decision or order Link to published decision
2020	David Fullerton Cleland	Professional Misconduct	Recommend that proceedings be commenced in the Supreme Court
Full name David Fullerton Cleland Business address * 123 Wright Street ADELADE SA 5000 Date(s) of admission Jurisdiction(s) of admission South Australia Home jurisdiction * South Australia Substance of Conduct Matter In preparing a will for an elderly relative, the Practitioner engaged in a course of conduct from October 2014-December 2014 involving the failure to comply with his professional obligations. The Practitioner was found guilty of seven counts of professional misconduct including: breaching his fiduciary duty to his client as he preferred his interests to those of his client; placing himself in a position of conflict by preparing wills for and on behalf of his client when he was both executor and beneficiary; not obtaining informed consent from his client; not assessing his client’s testamentary capacity; and not ensuring his client sought and obtained independent legal advice. The Tribunal found that he engaged in that conduct in circumstances in which failing to honour his obligations could have meant there could have been challenges to each of the wills. Decision Professional Misconduct Date of decision 09 October 2020 Disciplinary action taken Recommend that proceedings be commenced in the Supreme Court Notes Matter currently referred to the Full Court of the Supreme Court for consideration of the appropriate disciplinary action. Regulatory authority Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal Appeal Decision or order Link to published decision , Link to published decision