Legal Professional Conduct Hypothetical Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Legal Professional Conduct Hypothetical - Essay Example This breach attracts a penalty of 50 units. If the receipt is related to financial service, then Warren Robinson’s act of diverting Peter’s money will be a default relating to financial services or investments under section 373 of the said Act. Warren Robinson is also deemed to have breached section 34 of the Legal Profession Regulation 2007 (hereafter, the Regulation) governing receipt of trust money. In the absence of any information to this effect, there is a breach of section 34 (2) (4) & (5) of the Regulation. (Legal Profession Regulation, 2007). How the situation should have been handled. Warren should have deposited the money of Peter into the General Trust Account. Mitigation Warren can interpret the money received as a fee for financial service and which he need not have deposited into the trust account. Law society may be addressed as mentioned in section 239 of the Act for giving necessary directions and interpretations. 2. Susan is asked by George, the solic itor employee of Warren Robinson law firm, to pay $1,200 for the specific purpose of covering cost of medical reports. This will become a controlled money when received from Susan in terms of section 237 (1) defining the controlled money. By depositing the first part payment of $ 750 given by Susan into the general trust account, the firm breaches section 251 (1) of the Act which requires deposit of controlled money in a controlled money account held by an Authorized Deposit taking Institution (ADI).. Failure to deposit attracts a maximum penalty of 50 points. . The firm has breached Section 48 of the Regulation which requires a law firm to maintain a single controlled money receipt system and issue receipts accordingly. The office employee Mary has issued a trust account receipt instead of a controlled money receipt as directed by George, the solicitor employee of the firm. The firm has breached section 50 of the Regulation by issuing a cheque for $ 940 to the doctor on Susanâ€⠄¢s account by having it signed by George, who is not authorized to withdraw controlled money. Section 50 (1) of the Regulation stipulates that controlled money can only be withdrawn by an authorized principal of the law practice or an authorized legal practitioner associate or an authorized legal practitioner holding an unrestricted practicing certificate authorizing the receipt of trust money. It is not known whether George holds such a certificate. Warren issues a trust account cheque for $ 450 towards payment of the physiotherapist report without actually receiving funds from Susan thus apparently diverting somebody’s else’s money from the trust account. This is in violation of section 259 (1) of the Act, subsection (a) of which prohibits causing of a deficiency in any trust account or trust ledger account without a reasonable excuse. It attracts a maximum penalty of 200 units (legal Profession Act, 2007) and (Trust Accounting Guide, 2009). How the situation should have been handled The practice should have deposited in a controlled money account held by an (ADI). Mitigation Since a written direction is necessary to open a controlled money account, a defense may be available to the law firm for depositing it into general trust account in the absence of a written direction 3. Katrina, another solicitor employee of the law firm Robinson Associates, transfers $ 400 from the trust