The court examined six prior disciplinary proceedings that Mr Logan was the subject of, which included his failure to comply with the Legal Services Commissioner’s request for documents, for sending a letter that included a threat, and for acting, issuing and maintaining proceedings without instructions and conducting litigation without seeking instructions or first properly advising his client.

In the last disciplinary matter, Mr Logan was found guilty on 12 charges that included failing to take any or proper instructions from supposed clients, failing to properly advise the clients and acting while he was in a position of conflict.

He also failed to keep proper records, ceased to act without the client’s agreement or proper cause, and made false or misleading statements. The statements included telling an opponent that his law firm had instructions from the supposed client.

During the sixth proceeding, the trial judge found that while Mr Logan pleaded guilty to all charges, he said he did so to “save costs”, which “indicates a lack of insight into and acceptance of the wrongfulness of his conduct”. Although it did shorten the proceedings, “it deprives him of the benefit/credit which might otherwise be given”.

“Mr Logan has at no time expressed any remorse or offered any apology for his conduct either to the commissioner, the tribunal or the complainants. Mr Logan has not paid or offered any compensation,” the trial judge added.

In addition to his disciplinary history – which involved findings of professional misconduct and unsatisfactory professional conduct – orders to pay more than $32,000 in compensation are still ongoing. The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner submitted that this is indicative of a “lack of respect for the orders” and a lack of “insight as to the seriousness of his conduct”.

The court also took into account Mr Logan’s absence from the current matter. When a process server visited a property, he was told by a man that Mr Logan was not there. Mr Logan’s father, who took the documents, also claimed that Mr Logan was not there. However, following an examination of both men’s Facebook accounts, the process server concluded that the first man was the defendant.

VIEW ALL

This conduct in avoiding service and falsely denying his identity to the process server “indicated a current lack of fitness to be a legal practitioner”.

“I am comfortably satisfied that it is necessary to remove the defendant from the roll to protect the public from his misconduct and dishonesty and to promote community confidence in the proper administration of justice,” the court found.

“The defendant poses a direct and substantial risk to the public and to other members of the profession, each of whom both expect and rely on a system of professional co-operation and trust in dealings with the solicitor.”

The entire judgment can be read on AustLII or JADE: Victorian Legal Services Commissioner v Logan [2022] VSC 97 (28 February 2022).