Tax turmoil … Computer problems … Avoidance disorder … Chronology of mistimed events … Clinging to the jam roll … Client work prioritised … Distinction between personal and professional competence … Max Shanahan reports
Happily, however, a promise to “not do too much work for clients” helped solicitor Katrina Lind stave off an application by the Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner and Law Society of South Australia to have her struck from the jam roll.
Taxation dramas, a chronic inability to comply with court orders, and a finding of unprofessional conduct in relation to a decade-old inheritance matter saw Lind prohibited from practicing as a principal, and placed under the thumb of her former law-firm partner.
Justice Malcolm Blue’s finding is not the first bout of supervision for Ms Lind. In 2011, the Full Court censured Lind, fined her $20,000, ordered supervision for three years, and limited the amount of files she could take on.
The matter arose after the Bureau de Spank made a finding of “unprofessional conduct” in relation to Lind’s execution of the estate of a co-worker.
She failed to obtain probate in a timely manner, failed to report to beneficiaries for several years, took nine years to resolve the estate, and failed to respond to the Conduct Board after the co-worker’s father complained about her lawyering.
In December 2014, two months after Lind’s period under supervision had been completed, the Tax Office came calling, demanding lodgement of five years worth of missing income tax returns and activity statements.
Ignoring the notice, Lind was slapped with 23 tax-related charges in May 2015.
That same month, in a moment of great misfortune, Lind’s computer was attacked by ransomware. Despite engaging a “computer expert” to “reset the computer”, information relating to her tax affairs was – most inconveniently – lost into the ether.
Lind pled guilty to 18 of the Tax Office’s charges and was ordered – again – to lodge the missing returns. Having been convicted of a tax offence, she was required to file an affidavit with the court within seven days explaining why she remained a fit and proper person to hold a practising ticket.
Despite receiving advice as to her obligations, Lind nonetheless filed the affidavit late – a pattern repeated almost without fail in communications with the Conduct Commissioner, the Tax Office and the courts over the following years.
After another court appearance over missing tax returns in April 2019, Lind was once again ordered to provide a report on the state of her financial affairs to the Commissioner, Law Society and Tax Office.
Alas, Lind’s laptop – “which contained various documents” – was stolen before the due date, and the report was never filed.
A few more missing affidavits and tardy tax returns later, and the Commissioner and Law Society sought to have Lind defenestrated.
Justice Blue readily accepted many of the mitigating factors pled by Lind. His Honour took on board a psychiatrist’s report in finding that Lind’s multiple breaches of duty against multiple parties was fundamentally due to an “avoidant personality”.
There was also the deaths of Lind’s father and partner in 2017 and 2018, which explained “to a degree” her failure to file tax returns and comply with court orders.
In consultation with a psychiatrist, Lind devised a plan to deal with her chronic tardiness:
“… not doing too much work for clients; confining her work to areas of the law in which she had expertise; and taking action rather than just thinking about work.”
Blue J drew a distinction between Lind’s personal incompetence and her professional competence:
“Breaches in relation to tax affairs and compliance with court orders relate to her own affairs rather than the affairs of her clients. There is no evidence that she has breached her duty to clients since 2010.”
Nevertheless:
“If Ms Lind cannot satisfactorily manage her own taxation affairs and comply with court orders, this cannot be quarantined from a risk that she will not satisfactorily manage her client matters.”
Ultimately, Lind’s former fellow traveller in the law-firm partnership which collapsed after her 2011 unprofessional conduct finding came to the rescue, describing her as “highly intelligent” and “not lazy” and offering supervision.
Fingers crossed.