A Brisbane solicitor has been banned from holding a principal practising certificate, publicly reprimanded and ordered to undertake ethics training for breaching an undertaking to the Queensland Law Society.
Xiaoyu (Lorraine) Li applied for a principal practising certificate (PPC) on 12 March and 19 May 2021, in contravention of the undertaking she gave to the QLS on 21 June 2019.
In a 51-page Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal decision published on Wednesday, Justice Williams agreed with the Legal Services Commission’s (LSC) discipline application that raised two charges, finding Ms Li’s conduct should be categorised as professional misconduct.
Her Honour imposed, almost entirely, the sanctions proposed by the LSC. These included a public reprimand; a prohibition on being granted a PPC before 1 September 2025; completion of a QLS ethics course and practice management course; and evidence of completion of these courses to be included in her first application should she reapply for a PPC.
Ms Li had submitted that the discipline application should be dismissed, or alternatively, that her conduct should be characterised as no more than unsatisfactory professional conduct and the sanction should be no more than a public reprimand.
Justice Williams outlined how QLS had cancelled Ms Li’s PPC in April 2019 in relation to a failure to comply with three conditions of the certificate. Two months later, the Society granted her an employee practising certificate (EPC) on the condition she did not apply for another PPC before 1 July 2021.
Justice Williams pointed to Rule 6.1 of the Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules (ASCR), which expressly provides that an undertaking must be honoured and the solicitor must “ensure the timely and effective performance of the undertaking”.
“Here, the undertaking was given in the course of legal practice in that it formed the very condition precedent to the QLS granting an employee practising certificate,” she said.
She said in considering sanctions, the difficulty with the factors of insight, remorse, and co-operation was that the discipline application had become more complex over time due to Ms Li’s change in position, which had given rise to inconsistencies in her evidence.
“Given this, it is difficult to accept that the respondent truly understands the magnitude and seriousness of a contravention of an undertaking to the QLS about a practising certificate: the very licence to undertake the practice of the law and to hold oneself out as a solicitor,” she said.
“To maintain the argument that a breach of such an undertaking, particularly in light of the clear provision in Rule 6.1 of the ASCR, is a ‘mere slip’ gives rise to doubt as to whether the Respondent does in fact have real insight.”
Justice Williams said Ms Li’s contention that there was no real likelihood of any loss or damage to any third party, and that the QLS could and did monitor compliance, failed to recognise the damage to the profession.
“This forms part of the wider matrix in the ASCR, including not bringing the profession into disrepute and the paramount duty to the Court and the administration of justice,” she said.
She said the effect of the undertaking signed in 2019 was that Ms Li could not apply for a PPC for two years, so the solicitor had been unable to hold a PPC for an effective period of over five years.
“Accordingly, the Tribunal considers that it is appropriate to order that the Respondent not be granted a principal practising certificate before 1 September 2025.
“This includes a further period from the date of the Tribunal orders and takes into account the period in which the Respondent has been unable to hold a principal’s practising certificate.”
Justice Williams also ordered Ms Li to pay the LSC’s court costs.
Share this article