ALBERT ERNEST CLARK

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

The Legal Practitioners Complaints Committee alleged that Albert Ernest Clark was guilty of unsatisfactory conduct by acting in conflict of interest for an elderly (approx. 98-100 year old) client, preparing and arranging execution of a codicil under which he and his wife would receive $50,000 with payment priority. Clark recognised his duty to have the client independently advised and engaged an independent solicitor (Mr Sutherland), who took instructions but withdrew after learning of the Public Trustee's concerns and before completing the independent advice. Despite the independent solicitor never completing or giving the advice, Clark proceeded to arrange execution of the codicil. The Tribunal found this constituted unsatisfactory conduct because he could not have been satisfied that fully informed independent advice had been given. The Tribunal made no finding of dishonesty and expressly declined to rule on the client's testamentary capacity or the codicil's validity. Penalty was deferred to a later hearing.

Duties found breached:

• No unlawful discrimination or harassment
• Continuity and handover of representation
• No conflict between current clients