Lawyer suspended after false declaration to protect stepson

An in-house lawyer who swore a false declaration to help his stepson who was caught driving while using a mobile phone has had his practising certificate suspended until the end of this year.

The Legal Services Commissioner applied for disciplinary orders after the lawyer was convicted of two counts in the Magistrates Court related to the false declaration.

In 2022 the lawyer’s stepson, who was seeking entry to the Queensland Police Service, was driving when he was photographed with a mobile phone resting on his left leg.

An infringement notice was issued to the stepson which went unpaid and several months later the lawyer swore a statutory declaration to the effect that he was in control of the vehicle.

The infringement notice was cancelled and reissued. The matter was investigated leading to the lawyer being charged in relation to the false declaration.

The respondent pleaded not guilty but he was convicted, though no conviction was recorded and he was ordered to perform 150 hours community service.

Advertisement

In an affidavit presented to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal as part of the disciplinary hearing, the respondent admitted he had signed the statutory declaration “to protect my stepson from the potential ramification of the infringement”.¹

“I was concerned that the infringement would risk my stepson’s entrance into the Queensland Police Service, which he had worked towards for many years. I thought that the penalty would lead to his removal from the recruitment process and a rejection of his application to become a Police Officer.

“Whilst not an excuse, but merely an insight into my mindset at the time, I acted not out of self-interest but rather a blind loyalty to my family. I accept this was wrong. I did not give the matter enough thought before I acted, and I should have handled the situation differently.”

The respondent, who otherwise had an unblemished record of more than 20 years’ service as a solicitor, accepted that the conduct was properly categorised as professional misconduct as defined by s 419 of the Legal Profession Act.

In its decision the Tribunal noted “dishonest conduct by a lawyer will invariably be met with a serious response.”²

“It is well recognised that honesty and integrity are necessary characteristics of members of the legal profession. Courts rely upon that honesty and integrity when conducting the business of the Court. Members of the public rely upon that honesty and integrity when seeking to defend or progress their rights in litigation, to defend their liberty in criminal proceedings, and in the management of their personal and financial affairs.”

In considering an appropriate sanction, the Tribunal reviewed several cases dealing with removal or suspension from the roll³ before concluding that a fine was not sufficient remedy, noting “The imposition of a fine does not reflect the seriousness of the conduct, the strong necessity for general deterrence, and the necessity to protect the standing of the profession.”⁴

The Tribunal made the following orders:

1. The charge is proved and professional misconduct is established.
2. The respondent is publicly reprimanded.
3. The local practising certificate of the respondent is suspended from 1 February 2026 to 31 December 2026.
4. The respondent is to pay the costs of the Commissioner of the proceedings on the standard basis, to be assessed as if the matter were a proceeding in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

1. Legal Services Commissioner v Slater [2025] QCAT 528 [52] ↩︎
2. Ibid. [80} ↩︎
3. Ibid. [83]-[97] ↩︎
4. Ibid/ [109] ↩︎