§ discipline
‹ Browse decisions

Ziesolleck, Stefan Arthur

JurisdictionAustralia — New South Wales
BodyOffice of the Legal Services Commissioner (NSW) (OLSC)
Professionsolicitor — Norton Rose Fulbright Australia
Date06-Oct-2022
HearingCouncil of the Law Society of New South Wales
OutcomeReprimand Solicitor to undertake and complete further legal education Provide a written apology to the complainant $0.00 About ​ About the OLSC The Commissioner History Mission statement Structure Contact ​ Contact the OLSC Give us your feedback: online surveys Access to information (GIPAA) Community information ​ Information for lawyers Fact sheets FAQs Other regulatory and complaint-handling organisations Contact LawAccess NSW for legal information " You and Your Lawyer", Hot ​​Topics 78 Legal Information Access Centre (LIAC), State Library of NSW​ , provides access to information about the law in NSW regarding your lawyer Privacy Copyright and Disclaimer Website accessibility

Allegation / charges

<p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The Respondent Lawyer failed to inform the Complainant of a (potential) conflict of interest arising in respect of his involvement and handling of the matter.</p><p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The Respondent Lawyer sent correspondence which exceeded the legitimate assertions and entitlement of himself and his company and which attempted to mislead and intimidate the Complainant.</p><p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The Respondent Lawyer engaged in discourteous communications with the complainant by being rude, dismissive and inflammatory in his emails to the Complainant</p> — Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct

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

SanctionOther
Dishonesty foundNo

The Respondent Lawyer was found to have engaged in unsatisfactory professional conduct on three grounds: failing to disclose a potential conflict of interest, sending correspondence that exceeded his legitimate entitlements and attempted to mislead and intimidate the complainant, and communicating in a rude, dismissive and inflammatory manner. Although the correspondence 'attempted to mislead,' the tribunal made no express finding of dishonesty. No specific sanction is set out in the provided text.

Duties found breached:

⚠ figures not found verbatim in the source were dropped: ["extracted_from_register_summary"]

Duties engaged

Documents

No documents recorded.

Source: https://portal.olsc.nsw.gov.au/dasearchbn/daresultdetail?id=e4821966-c50c-4791-8127-292110402aaf