Login
Sydney man indefinitely disqualified from profession for trust account misconduct
An accountant who founded a boutique law firm in Sydney has been criticised by the Law Society for handling trust money without authorisation and putting his own financial interests ahead of clients.
Naomi Neilson
Qualified accountant and registered tax practitioner Eric Shu-Wah Ip, who founded and was the director of Onward Legal, has been indefinitely disqualified from managing or being employed by a law firm and being paid in connection with the practice of law.
To continue reading the rest of this article, please log in.
Create a free account to get unlimited news articles and more!
Mr Ip, who has never been a legal practitioner, and his firm were engaged to assist in the sale of units between 2017 and 2018.
In the course of that work, Mr Ip transferred thousands of dollars in and out of trust accounts. The money had been held by Onward Legal for the purpose of deposits for the units, and none of those purchasers had authorised the transfers to be made.
A further payment of over $22,000 had been made to Mr Ip’s personal credit card to reimburse himself for payments he had made on that credit card for one of the projects. This payment to himself was also found to be in breach of the Uniform Law.
“Mr Ip’s conduct was both a substantial and consistent failure to maintain a reasonable standard of competence and diligence that the public is entitled to expect of a reasonably competent lawyer in conduct occurring in connection with the practice of law,” the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) found.
Mr Ip admitted all the misconduct and conceded it showed he was not a fit and proper person to be associated with the profession.
Deputy president Susanne Cole, together with members Aaron Suthers and Philip Foreman, said his character has shown “he is not a fit and proper person” as he “prioritised his own financial interests over the interests of the clients of Onward Legal”.
“Had Mr Ip been a legal practitioner, his conduct would have amounted to both unsatisfactory conduct and professional misconduct,” the members noted.
“We bear in mind the need to denounce Mr Ip’s conduct for the purpose of the deterrence of others involved in legal practice, whether as a lay associate or as a solicitor, from behaving in a like manner.”
