ROXANNE MAREE McCARDLE

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

The State Administrative Tribunal of Western Australia found Roxanne Maree McCardle guilty of professional misconduct on three grounds arising from litigation she conducted on her own behalf against her ex-husband between 2013 and 2017: commencing/maintaining numerous baseless proceedings that were abuses of process; making baseless disqualification and restrain-counsel applications; making discourteous, intemperate and scandalous submissions and communications; misreading transcript in a manner that could mislead the court; and swearing and filing a false affidavit which she failed to correct. The Tribunal found she acted with reckless indifference regarding the false affidavit and misleading conduct but made no express finding of dishonesty (it declined to find she knew the affidavit was false). Given the seriousness, her disciplinary history and absence of remorse or prospect of rehabilitation, the Tribunal concluded strike-off was the only appropriate penalty and recommended her name be removed from the South Australian Roll of Practitioners. She was ordered to pay the applicant's costs fixed at $55,384.

Duties found breached:

• Not mislead the court
• No abuse of process or coercive powers
• Proper basis for allegations
• Cease acting on client perjury or disobedience
• No prejudicial publicity for pending cases
• Personal probity and fitness to practise
• Uphold public trust in the profession
• Good faith and courtesy to colleagues
• Not misrepresent regulated status

Aggravating factors:

• Conduct was not isolated but comprised multiple instances over a four-year period (2013-2017)
• Multiple departures from fundamental duties of fairness, honesty, candour and integrity
• No remorse expressed and no explanation offered
• Continuing disciplinary history including a 2015 WA finding, a 2016 Victorian finding and a 2022 SA Tribunal finding of unfitness
• Lack of insight/appreciation of impropriety indicating no prospect of rehabilitation
• Continued to assert lack of jurisdiction and did not engage with findings