On this Page

We are committed to providing an accessible, responsive service to all Victorians. While the majority of people communicate with us in a courteous manner, a small number of individuals can sometimes be angry, frustrated or distressed or act in other ways that may be challenging.

We recognise that people who demonstrate challenging behaviour often have a legitimate grievance and we will continue to deal with complaints on their merits. Our officers will treat people who contact us with courtesy, and we expect this courtesy to be returned. 

Our approach to dealing with challenging behaviour

Our staff can encounter a spectrum of challenging behaviour, from slightly confronting to clearly unreasonable, and our responses will be graduated as follows:

1. PREVENT where possible. We aim to prevent challenging behaviour by practising good complaint handling and communication skills.

2. RESPOND to challenging behaviour. We recognise that people who contact us may feel upset, distressed or angry. Our officers will respond to angry or emotional behaviour in the first instance by attempting to defuse the situation. We will give people reasonable time to express themselves, and listen and acknowledge what they are saying, and how they feel. 

3. MANAGE behaviour that is or becomes unreasonable. Behaviour becomes unreasonable when, because of its nature or frequency, it raises health, safety, resource or equity issues for the VLSB+C, our officers, or other people who use our services. Examples of behaviour or language that may be considered unreasonable include:

• Threats to harm officers or other people
• Verbal abuse
• Offensive language or behaviour
• Racist and sexist language
• Harassment of staff 
• Violence

Behaviour can also become unreasonable if it consumes a disproportionate amount of staff resources through unreasonable requests or communication. Examples of requests that may be considered unreasonable include:

• Asking for an immediate response or priority attention when it is not warranted
• Seeking a response to every point, no matter how minor
• Insisting on speaking with certain members of staff 

Examples of communication that may be considered unreasonable include:

• Constantly contacting us for updates while we are in the process of looking at a matter
• Contacting different officers seeking a different answer to a query
• Reframing an old complaint to look like there are new issues 
• Refusing to accept a decision after we have provided reasons for our decision and having been given a reasonable opportunity to discuss the reasons
• Questioning the skills or competence of staff

If a person’s behaviour becomes unreasonable, officers will apply appropriate and proportionate strategies for managing the behaviour. For example:

• If an officer experiences threats or verbal abuse, they will name the behaviour and ask the person to stop
• If an officer is bombarded with unwarranted calls or emails, they can ask the person to stop the behaviour, and set time limits for discussions, or limits to the types of emails they will respond to
• If a person demands an immediate response or priority that is not warranted or makes demands about how a matter should be handled, an officer can explain that they will not meet the demand and why. We deal with many matters and need to decide when and how they are handled

4. LIMIT access. As a last resort we can consider limiting access to our services if other strategies have not worked and the person continues to engage in unreasonable behaviour. Depending on the type of behaviour, we may consider limiting:

• Who the person can contact (e.g. limiting contact to a named officer)
• What issues we will respond to (e.g. not responding to issues that have already been the subject of an assessment and explanation, unless the person raises new issues that warrant attention)
• When a person can have contact
• Where the person can contact us (e.g. limiting locations for face-to-face meetings to secure areas)
• How the person can contact us (e.g. confining contact to writing where the person has been verbally abusive)

Managing the unreasonable behaviour of individuals with disabilities (including mental health issues)

We give serious consideration to the needs of individuals with a disability or mental health issue and take those needs into consideration in making decisions about restricting access to our services due to unreasonable behaviour. 

How you can appeal a decision to limit your access

If we have decided to limit your access and you object to our decision you may wish to contact an external oversight agency such as the Victorian Ombudsman, or, if you believe you have been discriminated against, the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission.

On this Page

Innovation in Legal practice

The Victorian Legal Services Board + Commissioner (VLSBC) sees the value in innovation. As the regulator, we encourage lawyers to look for new ways to streamline and improve their practice. We also wish to encourage the development of legal services that are more affordable and accessible to a greater range of people in the community. 

Fear of the regulator’s disapproval is sometimes cited as a reason why lawyers are reluctant to innovate and change the way they provide legal services. We seek to overcome this perceived barrier by providing an avenue for conversation with innovators in legal services and information provision.

Innovation and the Uniform Law

The Legal Profession Uniform Law (Vic) 2014 (“Uniform Law”) allows considerable flexibility for lawyers to step outside the usual models of practice, and permits exemptions or conditions on how the rules and regulations apply in a limited number of areas. By working together, we can not only assist you as you develop service models and innovations that comply with the law, but we can also gather insights to help us understand whether any reviews or amendments to the Uniform Law are needed in order to help the profession develop a better range of services. 

Our Approach

As a modern regulator, we need to regulate in a way that helps maintain the health and effectiveness of the profession, while still dealing with complaints and conduct that falls outside the acceptable boundaries. Our main focus is on whether consumers experience benefit or harm from a particular model of service rather than taking an overly technical approach to compliance. We also want the profession to have enough flexibility to modify how legal services are done, so that it can continue to serve the community in the best way possible.  

The innovation Inbox

How does it work?  If you have a new idea, you can contact us via the lawyer enquiry form and selecting the topic Innovation.  We can then have a conversation about the proposed service model or idea, discuss any concerns we might have and talk through the development of your proposal.  

For example, some people have approached us about the use of chatbots and the development of online legal information and self-help tools. We can discuss our general views about your proposal given the regulatory provisions, and help you make connections to find resources. We also involve the professional liability insurer, (the LPLC) where appropriate, and we can obtain other expert views in assessing your service. We are also able to give you a Regulatory Guidance letter from the Commissioner which sets out our views. 

Regulatory Guidance letter

A Regulatory Guidance letter expresses our view on how the rules of Ethics and the Uniform Law would apply to a particular model of practice or idea. The provision of legal services is always subject to the duties owed to clients, the Court and the administration of justice, and a Regulatory Guidance letter is not a waiver of any provision of the Uniform Law or Rules (unless an exemption is specifically granted). It is also not a private ruling binding on the Commissioner. 

What kinds of ideas are considered?  

So far, applicants have contacted us about online dispute resolution platforms, use of chatbots, different pricing and remuneration models, managing possible conflicts of interest through information barriers and online self-help platforms. In the coming months, we will share more stories and general guidance as they are developed.

General Guidance Resources

• Innovation in Pricing
• Going Digital: Record-keeping guidance
• Law firms offering non-legal services
• Tips for developing digital legal self-help tools 

Innovation case study

The Fitzroy Community Legal Centre contacted us through the Innovation Inbox. They had recently merged with another legal centre, and wanted to ensure they could perform an increased number of one-off community advice sessions. 

Lawyers are subject to strict rules to ensure that confidential information from one client doesn’t spread to another client who might be able to make use of that information against the first client. This rule has presented some significant difficulties to organisations like community legal centres because of the volume of demand for their services.

The merger with the second centre gave the management group an opportunity to think differently about how to handle that problem through putting in place Information Barriers that would prevent inappropriate access to another person’s information. We worked with the CLC as they designed their new system and provided a statement of regulatory guidance in relation to the final policy.

“The VLSBC remained a constructive and supportive resource throughout the merger of Darebin Community Legal Centre and Fitzroy Legal Service. The fact that they were willing to field numerous questions and review draft policies was an invaluable contribution. The VLSB+C’s support of our Information Barrier policy provided us with confidence that we had successfully struck the difficult balance of complying with our legal and professional obligations and enabling meaningful and accessible legal assistance to as many people as possible within the constraints of our working environment, staff capacity and resources.”

Jennifer Black, Principal Lawyer, Fitzroy Community Legal Service 

Contact us with your ideas

If you have an idea for a new way of doing business that benefits your clients, please contact us, we’d love to hear from you. Contact us via the lawyer enquiry form now.

Resources

Law Institute Journal Article: https://www.liv.asn.au/Staying-Informed/LIJ/LIJ/April-2020/Innovation--What%E2%80%99s-holding-us-back  

Legal Forecast On Speaker: https://www.thelegalforecast.com/tlf-on-speaker

Reimagining Justice podcast: https://www.andreaperrypetersen.com.au/regulation-innovation-technology-ethics-lawyers-consumers/

Centre for Legal Innovation panel discussion: https://www.cli.collaw.com/clic/2020/07/15/reinvent-legal-business-series-beyond-the-legal-innovation-hype-there-is

Centre for Legal Innovation podcast: https://www.cli.collaw.com/podcast/2019/09/09/episode-4-the-new-emerging-role-of-legal-industry-regulation-and-regulators

Legally Yours video discussion on ‘Legal Pricing and the Law’: https://vimeo.com/458902153

On this Page

This section provides information for the community about the VLSB+C's views on current issues.

Statement on Dean Hadjina

18 December 2024

We advise that Mr Dean Hadjina does not currently hold a practising certificate and is therefore unable to engage in legal practice. Accordingly, Mr Hadjina is prohibited from advertising, representing or implying that he can engage in legal practice.

If you are looking for legal help or are approached by someone offering legal services, we urge you to take the simple step of searching our Register of Lawyers to make sure you only deal with a qualified lawyer who holds a current practising certificate. 

Statement on Savvas Hercules

6 August 2024

We advise that Mr Savvas Hercules does not currently hold a practising certificate and is therefore unable to engage in legal practice. Accordingly, Mr Hercules is prohibited from advertising, representing or implying that he is entitled to engage in legal practice.

On 27 May 2024, a manager was appointed to the law practice of which Mr Hercules was an associate, Hercules Legal. The manager is now in the process of winding up the law practice.

Statement on Zoe Davis, Rachelle Badour-Taha and ZD Legal Pty Ltd trading as ZD Legal or ZAD Law

2 August 2024

We advise that Ms Zoe Davis and Ms Rachelle Badour-Taha do not currently hold practising certificates and are therefore unable to engage in legal practice. We also advise that on 12 July 2024, the Victorian Legal Services Board appointed Alan Alpass, Principal at Alpass and Associates, as Manager of the law practice ZD Legal Pty Ltd, trading as ZD Legal or ZAD Law. On 25 July 2024, the Board also appointed Paul McCarthy, principal at Russell Kennedy, as an additional Manager of the law practice.

Statement on Peter Mericka

17 January 2024

The Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner (VLSB+C) has successfully applied to the Supreme Court of Victoria to have Peter Mericka removed from the roll of lawyers. Delivering her judgment on 12 January, Justice Claire Harris dismissed as “scandalous and without foundation” Mr Mericka’s allegations of corruption and misconduct against several parties including the VLSB+C. You can read the decision here.

Statement on Nick Marcevski

11 December 2023

The Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner (VLSB+C) cancelled the practising certificate of Nick Marcevski of Marcevski Lawyers on 16 October 2023 and prohibited him from reapplying until 22 September 2028. This decision is subject to appeal. Mr Marcevski sought a stay of that decision pending the appeal. The stay was refused by VCAT on 30 November 2023 (a decision which is also subject to an appeal period). The decision is published here. 

A manager was appointed to Marcevski Lawyers on 31 July 2023. The manager is now in the process of winding up the law practice.

Statement on Alex Elliott

1 August 2023

The Victorian Legal Services Board CEO and Commissioner Fiona McLeay recently acted as a court-appointed contradictor in the matter of Alex Christopher Elliott, a solicitor named in the Banksia Securities Limited group proceeding. This matter has concluded with the removal, by consent, of Mr Elliott’s name from the roll of practitioners maintained by the Supreme Court. This means that Mr Elliott is not able to practise as a lawyer in any jurisdiction in Australia.

Practising Certificate of Patrick Lennon

19 July 2023

We advise that Mr Patrick Lennon does not currently hold a practising certificate and is therefore unable to engage in legal practice.

Practising Certificate of Jane Lennon

19 July 2023

We advise that Ms Jane Lennon does not currently hold a practising certificate and is therefore unable to engage in legal practice.

Practising Certificate of Daniel James Tresise

27 June 2023

We advise that Mr Daniel James Tresise does not currently hold a practising certificate and is therefore unable to engage in legal practice.

Statement on Roona Nida

31 March 2023

Former barrister Roona Nida was today ordered to pay $110,000 in costs after being found guilty of contempt of court last month.

We prosecuted Ms Nida for contempt after she breached an injunction we obtained against her in 2021, prohibiting her from undertaking legal work. The injunction also barred Ms Nida from representing that she was entitled to engage in legal practice, or doing anything that stated or implied as much.

The Supreme Court of Victoria ruled on 7 February 2023 that Ms Nida had failed to comply with the injunction when she represented her son in court in 2022. Ms Nida had claimed she only sought to assist her son in her capacity as his mother. You can read the decision here.

Ms Nida has not held a barrister practising certificate since August 2021. This means she must not engage in legal practice or claim she is qualified to do so.

Practising certificate of Dr James Andrew McConvil

10 February 2023

We advise that Dr James Andrew McConvill does not currently hold a practising certificate and is therefore unable to engage in legal practice.

Dr McConvill is also prohibited from advertising, representing or implying that he is entitled to engage in legal practice.

Practising certificate of Peter Connor

21 December 2022

We advise that Mr Peter Connor does not currently hold a practising certificate and is therefore unable to engage in legal practice.

Mr Connor is also prohibited from advertising, representing or implying that he is entitled to engage in legal practice.

The law practice of Peter Connor, also known as Constable Connor & Co (https://constableconnorwills.com.au/) has also ceased and is not able to operate as a law practice.

Statement on the sentencing of Dennis Wayne Jensen

13 October 2022

Today Dennis Wayne Jensen was sentenced to three months' imprisonment, suspended for 12 months by the Supreme Court of Victoria, after he was earlier found guilty of contempt of court. Mr Jensen was also ordered to pay the Board’s costs. Mr Jensen had breached a 2018 Court injunction which banned him from undertaking legal work.

Mr Jensen is not a lawyer. He has never held any legal qualifications and his companies have never been registered as law practices. It is a criminal offence in Victoria for an unqualified person to undertake legal work, or falsely claim that they are qualified to engage in legal practice. Despite this, he has provided legal services to unsuspecting people on several occasions, including representing them in court.

In 2018 we obtained an injunction against Mr Jensen from offering any legal services to prevent him causing further harm to the public. Unfortunately, in 2020 he breached that injunction by providing unqualified legal advice to a man accused of a serious criminal offence. Acting in reliance on this advice led to the man breaching a court order, which resulted in a further criminal charge. We subsequently prosecuted Mr Jensen for contempt of court, and he was found guilty in August this year.

Mr Jensen’s conduct is one of the most serious examples of unqualified legal practice we have seen. We welcome today’s penalty as it sends a strong message to anyone thinking about following in Mr Jensen’s footsteps – fake lawyers face serious consequences.

If you are looking for legal help or are approached by someone offering legal services, we urge you to take the simple precaution of searching our Register of Lawyers to make sure you only deal with a qualified lawyer. No one else has the proper knowledge, skills and training to assist you.

Using a qualified lawyer also means we can help you if you are unhappy with your lawyer’s service.

People Shop Pty Ltd Trading as Erudite Legal

22 August 2022

The Victorian Legal Services Board has appointed Mr Howard Rapke, Managing Partner of Holding Redlich, as Manager of the law practice People Shop Pty Ltd trading as Erudite Legal (“the Law Practice”). The appointment of Mr Rapke has been made under to Chapter 6 of Legal Profession Uniform Law. The appointment means that Mr Rapke now has operational control of the Law Practice.

Mr Rapke may now undertake a range of functions including transacting any urgent business of the Law Practice, performing work on client matters, charging and recovering costs and may wind up the Law Practice. Mr Rapke may also exclude persons from the Law Practice who have previously been associated with it.

The Board has appointed Mr Rapke as Manager as a result of concerns held by the Board about the manner in which the Law Practice was delivering legal services and failures to comply with the regulator's directions and its investigator’s requirements.

Mr Rapke’s appointment is for six months commencing on 20 August 2022.  

Quotes attributable to Victorian Legal Services Commissioner and Board CEO Fiona McLeay:

“The Victorian Legal Services Board is committed to the effective regulation of the legal profession and maintaining high standards in the profession for the purpose of protecting consumers of legal services. The Board has powers to intervene in law practices where it is satisfied that intervention is warranted and is entitled to recover the costs of intervention from the law practice concerned”.

Practising certificate of Paul Simon

30 June 2022

We advise that Mr Paul Simon does not currently hold a practising certificate and is therefore unable to engage in legal practice.

Supreme Court of Victoria decision on Mr Anthony Zita

24 June 2022

The Honourable Justice Dixon has handed down his decision in Anthony Zita (A Solicitor) today. Mr Zita was a solicitor named in the Banksia Securities Limited group proceeding.  The reasons state that Mr Zita has been suspended from practice until 1 July 2024. The Court has ordered that this will come into effect 14 days from today, to allow Mr Zita to consider his options in respect of the decision. After this, Mr Zita will be unable to engage in legal practice and will be prohibited from advertising, representing or implying that he is entitled to engage in legal practice.

We note that His Honour states at paragraph 108:

“I am comfortably satisfied that the findings made in the remitter judgment in respect of Mr Zita’s conduct show that he was unfit to work with judges and legal practitioners to ensure that justice is administered with integrity. Simply put, Mr Zita cannot be trusted to be fearlessly independent. He cannot be trusted to put the integrity of the administration of justice above all else, particularly personal or private interests. Plainly, that character trait – his vulnerability to complying with powerful authority figures – demonstrated, and continues to demonstrate, an inability to recognise when independent judgment was, and is, necessary, and an incapacity to recognise when the proper administration of justice was being corrupted and how that consequence might have been, or can be, avoided by proper ethical conduct.”

His Honour also sates at paragraph 110:

“My finding that Mr Zita is presently unfit to practise because he lacks the character and trustworthiness necessary to discharge the responsibilities of legal practice, would ordinarily require that he be struck off. I do not extend that finding to a conclusion that he is permanently or indefinitely unfit to practise, which opens for consideration the submission put on Mr Zita’s behalf that suspension is the appropriate response.”

 

Statement regarding Ms Dominique Grubisa

22 June 0022

Ms Dominique Grubisa no longer holds a practising certificate in Victoria. She is therefore currently not entitled to engage in legal practice anywhere in Australia.

Ms Grubisa is also prohibited from advertising, representing or implying that she is entitled to engage in legal practice.

We are aware of the recent ASIC decision and recent media interest relating to Ms Grubisa and her various business entities, and we are currently considering what other regulatory action is necessary.

 

Appointment of a manager to the law practice trading as 'Dean's of Law'

18 May 2022

On 3 September 2021, the VLSB+C appointed Mr Howard Rapke of Holding Redlich as Manager of the law practice of Dean’s of Law Pty Ltd, trading as ‘Dean’s of Law’, and operated by Mr Dean Hadjina from premises at 326 Keilor Road, Airport West, Victoria.  The Manager was appointed to take over professional and operational responsibilities for the law practice until 6 June 2022, unless extended by the VLSB+C. 

The law practice office has been closed and the firm has ceased operating. The Manager is in the process of winding up the law practice.  As a result:

• the Manager intends to close the email accounts effective from 27 May 2022; 
• until 5 June 2022, queries about professional or operational matters concerning the law practice should be directed to the Manager at Howard.Rapke@holdingredlich.com; and
• from 6 June 2022 onwards, all enquiries (including if you are attempting to locate documents/files once held by the law practice) should be directed to the VLSB+C on (03) 9679 8001 or via our consumer enquiry form which can be found at https://lsbc.vic.gov.au/consumers/consumer-enquiry-form.

Practising certificate of Elisa Berry

4 May 2022

We advise that Ms Elisa Berry does not currently hold a practising certificate and is therefore unable to engage in legal practice.

Update: Statement regarding referral of conduct of Findlay McRae

10 March 2022

We have now concluded our investigation into the matters referred to us by the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants regarding the conduct of the Executive Director of Legal Services at Victoria Police Findlay McRae.

Having conducted a thorough examination of these matters, we have determined Mr McRae’s conduct does not constitute unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct and we will not be taking disciplinary action.

Update: Avant-Garde Logistics Solutions Pty Ltd trading as Apex Logistics Solutions (Apex Logistics) and its representatives, RM Legal Consultants, Law Innovation, New Edge Law, and/or Erudite Legal

10 January 2022

Further to our post dated 4 May 2021:

We had previously been notified about RM Legal Consultants, which as at May 2021 was not entitled to engage in legal practice, and Law Innovation. Law Innovation was not and is not currently registered with the VLSB+C.

Subsequently, RM Legal Consultants ceased operation and the VLSB+C has become aware that another law practice is acting for Apex Logistics, namely People Shop Pty Ltd trading as New Edge Law, and/or Erudite Legal.

Any complaints from people accessing services provided by Apex Logistics about the conduct of its legal representatives must and will be dealt with in accordance with the appropriate provisions of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (Victoria).

We are concerned about legal work done in, or relating to, legal proceedings that have been commenced or threatened against consumers by Apex Logistics.

If you or someone you know has sustained a financial loss, or is presently in dispute with Apex Logistics, and Apex Logistics has:

• sent you correspondence from solicitors;
• threatened legal proceedings; or
• commenced legal proceedings,

please contact us on 9679 8001 or via our consumer enquiry form.

Legal practitioners who represent clients in matters where the client does not have a sound basis for the proceedings (“cause of action”) or who behave in a manner which may bring the profession into disrepute, may be subject to disciplinary action or suspension or cancellation of their practising certificate.
 

In response to article, ‘Anti-vax lawyer asks supporters to stop calling for refunds’, which appeared in the December 16 print edition of The Age:

16 December 2021

When a Manager is appointed to a law practice, they take over control of funds held in the law practice trust account by operation of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (Victoria). The Manager is then legally obligated to only deal with the funds in accordance with the legislation and cannot release any funds without the proper records, evidence of entitlement and authority. The funds are therefore not being held unlawfully.

Hall & Wilcox (the manager of Ms Teffaha’s practice) are currently working with a forensic accountant, engaged by the Board, to reconcile the trust account. They have established a process whereby clients will be able to seek refunds of their money if they provide evidence in support of their claims. See website link: https://hallandwilcox.com.au/manager-advocate-me/

Avant-Garde Logistics Solutions Pty Ltd trading as Apex Logistics Solutions (Apex Logistics) and their representatives, RM Legal Consultants and Law Innovation

4 May, 2021

We are aware of concerns that have been expressed by consumers in relation to the conduct of Avant-Garde Logistics Solutions Pty Ltd trading as Apex Logistics Solutions (Apex Logistics) and their representatives, RM Legal Consultants and Law Innovation.

RM Legal Consultants have not employed any legal practitioners since 1 July 2020 and cannot engage in legal practice.

Law Innovation is not registered with the VLSB+C and cannot engage in legal practice.

It appears that legal practitioners from other entities may be acting for Apex Logistics.

We have received complaints from people accessing services provided by Apex Logistics about the conduct of their legal representatives. These complaints are being dealt with in accordance with the appropriate provisions of the Uniform Law.

We are concerned about legal work done relating to legal proceedings that have been commenced or threatened against consumers by Apex Logistics.

If you or someone you know has sustained a financial loss, or is presently in dispute with Apex Logistics, and Apex Logistics has:

• sent you correspondence from solicitors;
• threatened legal proceedings; or
• commenced legal proceedings;

Please contact us on 9679 8001 or via our consumer enquiry form.

Legal practitioners who represent clients in matters where the client does not have a sound cause of action or who behave in a manner which may bring the profession into disrepute, may be subject to disciplinary action including suspension or cancellation of their practising certificate.

Serene Teffaha and Advocate Me

15 April, 2021

VLSB+C confirms that, from 15 April 2021, lawyer Serene Teffaha no longer has a practising certificate and cannot engage in legal practice. 

An independent Manager, Mr Jacob Uljans, has been appointed to take over professional and operational responsibilities for her law practice Advocate Me. This appointment is for 6 months, unless ceased or extended by the VLSB+C. 

Queries in relation to professional and operational matters concerning the law practice should be directed to the manager at manageradvocateme@hallandwilcox.com.au.

Statement regarding referral of conduct of Findlay McRae

30 November, 2020

In its Final Report, the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants has referred the conduct of the Executive Director of Legal Services at Victoria Police, Mr Findlay McRae, to the Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner (VLSB+C) for consideration. The referral is made pursuant to section 44 of the Inquiries Act.

VLSB+C confirms communication between the Commissioner, the Honourable Margaret McMurdo AC, and our office has taken place. In line with section 462 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law, we will not make any further comment at this time.

Correspondence regarding Minter Ellison, DHHS and the COVID-19 Hotel Quarantine Inquiry

28 October, 2020

The Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner confirm receipt of correspondence from Mr Ed O’Donohue MP regarding Minter Ellison, DHHS and the COVID-19 Hotel Quarantine Inquiry. While the COVID-19 Hotel Quarantine Inquiry is underway it would be inappropriate to take action or comment further at this stage. However, we note that the findings of the Inquiry are due to be delivered shortly. After assessing those findings we will make a decision about whether to conduct an investigation into these matters.

If an investigation is commenced, we will not be able to make any further comment. 

Apology to Mr Neil Fairley and Karne Group Pty Ltd 

10 September, 2020

On page 13 of our 2018-19 Annual Report we refer to the prosecution of Victorian Legal Services Board vs Neil Fairley & Karne Group Pty Ltd. 

The report notes that we concluded 16 prosecutions for unqualified legal practice and then lists Mr Fairley & Karne Group as an example of a prosecution.

The report does not clarify that in the case of Mr Fairley & Karne Group the prosecution was unsuccessful and that, according to Magistrate Tan: 

• Mr Fairley and Karne Group Pty Ltd had provided information in the normal course of running their business; and
• We could not make out our allegation that they had breached section 10 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (Victoria) by engaging in legal practice without qualification.

We apologise for any distress the reference in our annual report may have caused Mr Fairley & Karne Group.  

Unfounded and vexatious allegations of corruption against VLSB+C by Mr Peter Mericka

02 September, 2020

The Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner are aware of allegations of corruption made against our office by Mr Peter Mericka. We consider these allegations to be unfounded and vexatious and have directed him to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission and the Victorian Ombudsman.

Practising certificates of Norman O'Bryan and Michael Symons

25 August, 2020

The Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner confirm that Norman O’Bryan and Michael Symons no longer have practising certificates and cannot engage in legal practice in Victoria.

In 2017, in response to the rising rates of women’s incarceration, we identified Keeping Women Out of the Justice System (KWOJS) as a priority-funding theme of our grants program.