Powered by
MOMENTUM
MEDIA
A West Australian lawyer’s legal career has ended almost as quickly as it began after he was caught lying about two former jobs.
In an application to the Legal Practice Board of Western Australia to have supervision conditions removed from his practising certificate, Mohit Dutta claimed he was overseen by senior lawyers while he worked as a legal counsel at Land Services WA and an in-house lawyer for Hollard.
In reality, his roles were in contract management and IT, and one manager was not a legal practitioner. While the other manager was, Dutta did not engage in legal practice under his supervision.
When the board questioned Dutta, he doubled down on the lies.
Dutta agreed to a finding of professional misconduct and a recommendation by the Western Australia State Administrative Tribunal (WASAT) that his name be struck from the roll.
Dutta was admitted in December 2021 but was employed in non-legal roles within Land Services and Hollard until March 2024.
In February 2024, Dutta approached Taylor Rose Australia about entering into a contractual agreement where he would provide legal services, personally or through another entity, on its behalf.
Almost two weeks after his application to the board, Dutta caused Ishana Law to be incorporated. At no time was it a qualified entity that was entitled to, or represent it was entitled to, engage in practice.
Dutta also created a website for Ishana Law that included a reference to his false legal roles at Land Services and Hollard.
In May that same year, the board contacted Dutta about his application and said it understood Hollard had no legal practitioners in Western Australia who would have been able to support him.
Dutta claimed he was supervised remotely by a team in Sydney.
He then said: “I respectfully submit that the work [at LSWA and Hollard] is not quasi-legal in nature and instead it is legal practice.”
During a later phone call, Dutta refuted having any intention to start his own legal practice if the board removed the supervision. By this stage, Ishana Law had been established for around three months.
A notice was issued in June 2024 for the purpose of investigating whether he made false or misleading statements.
In response to a number of questions – including why he incorrectly represented that he worked in legal roles – Dutta objected to answer “on the basis that this is not information that you reasonably required”.
A second notice was sent with the intention of investigating whether he failed to comply with the first notice and whether he “obstructed, frustrated or otherwise hindered” the board’s investigation, or attempted to do so. Dutta was found to have engaged in both.
While Dutta was found to have advertised and represented that he and Ishana Law were entitled to engage in legal practice, there was no intention that either he or the company did engage in practice.
In addition to the strike-off recommendation, Dutta was ordered to pay the board’s costs in the sum of $744.
Citation: Legal Practice Board and Dutta [2026] VR 4.
