MARTIN LEE SEGLER

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

The State Administrative Tribunal of Western Australia found legal practitioner Martin Lee Segler guilty of professional misconduct on four grounds: failing to pay trust money into a trust account (six instances), intentionally misleading the Family Court, substantially failing to maintain a reasonable standard of competence and diligence in the Glusica matter, and failing to respond to the Committee's enquiries and summonses. Other allegations were not made out. The Tribunal concluded he may not be a fit and proper person to remain in the profession and, rather than imposing a penalty itself, made and transmitted a report to the Supreme Court (Full Bench) recommending his name be removed from the Roll of Practitioners. The practitioner was ordered to pay the Committee's costs of AUD 18,790.60 within 42 days. Although the Tribunal found intentional misleading of the court, it did not make an express finding of 'dishonesty' and noted the trust breaches occurred 'even in the absence of dishonesty'.

Duties found breached:

• Not mislead the court
• Uphold public trust in the profession
• Competence
• Report serious misconduct of others

Aggravating factors:

• Sustained course of conduct over several years
• Disturbing repetition of behaviour, particularly attitude towards the Court (prior finding of knowingly misleading the court in Segler [2010])
• Prior disciplinary history including misappropriation of trust monies, overcharging, undue delay and prior professional misconduct findings
• Misleading conduct occurred on three separate occasions during one hearing and practitioner failed to answer direct question from the judge
• Limited insight into the seriousness of his conduct

Mitigating factors:

• Practitioner was unwell and distressed at the relevant time
• No misappropriation of clients' money for any improper purpose and no failure to account
• Practitioner expressed contrition after reviewing the authorities
• No longer holds a practising certificate and closure of practice caused significant personal and financial hardship
• 30 years in practice