Powered by
MOMENTUM
MEDIA
A disgruntled former practitioner repeatedly made baseless claims of dishonest and criminal conduct against a solicitor in complaints lodged with the Federal Court and a legal practice board.
Former practising solicitor Michael Barker understandably “felt some disquiet” when he noticed errors relating to a medical condition in his ex-partner’s affidavit, which the West Australian State Administrative Tribunal (WASAT) accepted was capable of being “misunderstood”.
Those errors were attributed to his ex-partner’s solicitor, Ms L.
Rather than contacting Ms L about making a clarification – and, if rebuffed, seeking to cross-examine the ex-wife or put on a responsive affidavit – Barker “proceeded to accuse [Ms L] of deliberately fabricating evidence”, WASAT said in a decision published late last week.
The complaints were repeated in complaints to the Legal Practice Board, along with allegations that Ms L was “intentionally using the [board] and their misleading reports against [him]” and was trying to divert attention away from Ms L’s “extremely serious breaches” of the Conduct Rules.
In letters to the Family Court of Western Australia, addressed to the principal registrar, Barker alleged the court had “ignored, condoned or refused to address criminal behaviour”, and the court had engaged in conduct that amounted to “a perversion of the course of justice”.
He added justice was perverted in several ways, including the court’s refusal to accept affidavits “describing the criminal and unethical behaviour” of Ms L and “the likely refusal of this submission”.
The Legal Practice Board also provided emails to the tribunal that showed Barker accusing its officers of engaging in “corruption or misfeasance”, including a suggestion that they look “under the criminal charges against public officials in the Criminal Code”.
The tribunal was also taken to letters Barker lodged for filing that accused the board and its officers of acting unprofessionally, and alleged the committee was an “organised crime organisation”.
WASAT deputy president, Judge Henry Jackson, along with senior member John O’Sullivan and member Ross Povey, was satisfied there were no reasonable grounds or proper basis to have made the allegations.
“A reasonable person in Barker’s position (i.e. a former practising solicitor) would know of the obligation to refrain from making such allegations without a proper basis. They would also know of the court’s rules, which reflect and enforce that obligation,” the bench said.
Judge Jackson added Barker’s allegations have “actively undermined the integrity of the legal profession, the courts and the legal system”.
Barker was found guilty of three counts of professional misconduct. A hearing into penalty and costs will soon follow.
