DAVID CHARLES LEASK

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

The Full Bench of the WA Supreme Court gave reasons for consent orders in disciplinary proceedings against practitioner David Charles Leask. The Tribunal found professional misconduct: he failed to progress two clients' matters over years and knowingly misled client Mr B about the status of proceedings on eight occasions (false representations made with intent to deceive), even paying him $10,500 of his own money out of guilt. Although the LPCC originally sought striking off, in light of psychiatric/psychological evidence attributing his conduct to procrastination/avoidance personality traits, his developed insight and completion of therapy, and his intention to practise only under supervision, the court accepted consent orders. The court found he was not intrinsically dishonest or lacking integrity, though it recognised the deceptive representations. Orders: undertaking not to apply for a practising certificate before 1 July 2015; conditions requiring supervised practice, supervisor affidavit and medical fitness report; application otherwise dismissed; practitioner to pay costs to be taxed.

Duties found breached:

• Not mislead third parties or opponents
• Uphold public trust in the profession
• Competence
• Diligence and timeliness

Aggravating factors:

• Prior disciplinary history (2006 findings including making incorrect representations to a client and failure to respond to the LPCC, with fines of $1,500 and $7,000)
• Repeated deceptive representations to clients over an extended period
• Failure to advise clients of significant developments (e.g. dismissal applications)

Mitigating factors:

• Psychological/personality basis for procrastination and avoidance behaviour (avoidant-obsessive), not major mental or personality disorder
• No financial motive; in fact incurred personal financial loss by paying Mr B $10,500 of his own funds to 'tide him over'
• Court found he was not intrinsically dishonest nor lacking in integrity
• Developed insight and undertook cognitive behaviour therapy, going to considerable lengths to obtain it
• Otherwise good reputation, competence, pro bono work and modest fees
• Frank and forthright with his current employer
• Willingness to practise only under supervision