A Queensland tribunal recommended the name of a solicitor be removed from the roll for his failures to deliver competent, diligent, and timely legal services to immigration clients.
Matthew David McCormick, former director of McCormick’s Law and employee of Ashlar Legal, had his name recommended for removal after being found to have engaged in both unsatisfactory professional conduct and professional misconduct.
The Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) was satisfied McCormick failed to deliver legal services “competently, diligently and as promptly as reasonably possible” to three clients who engaged him for two separate immigration matters.
For the first, McCormick was retained around December 2019 to lodge a distinguished talent visa, which was rejected in July 2021.
The client only learnt of the refusal 16 days later and made multiple unanswered requests for a copy of the decision. The client received it only after persistent, direct contact with the Department of Immigration, and seven days past the appeal deadline.
In an unknown date in 2020, McCormick was retained by the second and third client to make an application for permanent residency. One of the client’s work-sponsored visas was due to expire in March 2021.
While McCormick advised the clients he was in a position to make the residency application from January, they were only informed by a firm employee that it was ready to be lodged in late February.
However, it was not until a day before the visa expiry that McCormick requested the client’s bank details for the application fee. The application was knocked back later that night due to banking issues.
A bridging visa was made the following day but was not granted for several days. By the time the residency application was actually made, the clients had been without a visa for about six days.
Those same clients informed McCormick they no longer wished to engage him in September 2021. Despite repeated requests, McCormick failed to provide them with a full copy of their file.
The four charges brought in respect of the three clients were characterised as unsatisfactory professional conduct.
McCormick’s failure to comply with written notices from the Legal Services Commission amounted to professional misconduct.
Justice Frances Williams, together with panel members Petrina Macpherson and Keith Revell, said McCormick had shown he was permanently unfit to remain in legal practice.
Given he did not engage with the commission or tribunal, they also inferred McCormick was “indifferent to his legal obligations and his status as a member of the legal profession”.
“Accordingly, the tribunal is satisfied that it is appropriate to recommend the name of the respondent … he removed from the roll of legal practitioners in Queensland,” the tribunal concluded.
The three clients have made applications for compensation for a figure in advance of $50,000, but Justice Williams said he would first require further evidence and submissions to deal with it.
The case: Legal Services Commissioner v McCormick [2025] QCAT 299
Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly.
You can email Naomi at:
