ALAN JAMES CAMP

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

The State Administrative Tribunal of Western Australia found practitioner Alan James Camp guilty of unprofessional conduct on three references arising from the Hancock/Rinehart matters: breaking into his employer's desk at night to obtain a copy of Mr Hancock's Will (22(A), to which he pleaded guilty, the Tribunal accepting he had Mr Hancock's authority to get the Will); offering to sell confidential client information to Channel 7 and Channel 9 for money while in financial difficulty (22(C), breaching Professional Conduct Rules 7.1 and 7.5); and distributing to journalists a chronology containing serious allegations against Mrs Porteous before that evidence was given in the Coronial Inquiry (22(D)). Reference 22(B) was withdrawn. No express finding of dishonesty was made. The Tribunal deferred sanction, directing that submissions be made as to the appropriate orders.

Duties found breached:

• No prejudicial publicity for pending cases
• No conflict between current clients
• Good faith and courtesy to colleagues

Aggravating factors:

• Offer to disclose highly sensitive confidential information (including the break-in and that Mr Hancock's hand was held to sign a codicil) to the media for money
• Distribution of a chronology containing very serious/terrible allegations against Mrs Porteous in advance of any evidence being given
• Inconsistencies between his sworn evidence before the Tribunal and his earlier affidavit/statutory declarations, raising credibility concerns

Mitigating factors:

• Practitioner pleaded guilty to reference 22(A) and accepted his conduct was unprofessional
• Tribunal accepted he had Mr Hancock's authority to obtain a copy of the Will, making that breach less serious
• Chronology was prepared by senior and junior counsel, not by the practitioner (relevant to penalty)
• In respect of reference 22(C), Mrs Rinehart later 'came good' and the media approach did not proceed