Martin Lee Segler, Family Law Solicitor from WA, Struck Off Register

FavoriteLoadingAdd to favourites

Select to highlight: Tags | People | Institutions | Precedents |

martin-lee-seglerA WA solicitor has been dumped from the roll of practitioners following a string of professional misconduct findings made against him.

The Legal Profession Complaints Committee sought an order in the WA Supreme Court for Martin Lee Segler to be removed from the roll following several findings of professional misconduct made against him by the State Administrative Tribunal.

The tribunal found that Martin Lee Segler failed to deposit trust money from six clients to the credit of his trust account between August 2007 and May 2010, failed to file a statement of claim for a client between 2008 and 2009, and intentionally misled or attempted to mislead the Family Court in 2009.

Martin Lee Segler also failed to respond to the committee’s inquiries between June 2010 and March 2011, and failed to comply with summonses to produce documents.

In previous cases in 2001, Mr Segler pleaded guilty to unprofessional conduct in that, in 1997, he applied trust moneys in payment of costs and disbursements and did not serve a bill of costs within 14 days of so doing. At the same time he pleaded guilty to an allegation of neglect and undue delay in relation to the same client.

In 2003, Mr Segler was found guilty of three complaints in respect of another matter involving a failure to properly make a claim under the Inheritance (Family Independants Provision) Act 1972 (WA) between 1997 and 1999.

On 11 March 2010 the Committee found that Martin Lee Segler was guilty of wrongly advising a client to breach the Builders Registration Act and was guilty of a misleading response to the Committee. He was suspended for 3 months with costs of $9,674.

In March 2010, the WA Administrative Tribunal will make the following orders in relation to Mr Segler:

Having regard to the WA Administrative Tribunal’s finding that, in or about the month of November 2007, the respondent was guilty of unsatisfactory

  • conduct by unprofessional conduct in sending a letter written on his letterhead containing threats and inappropriate and intimidating demands to one, Hayden Groves, as agent for Charles Dortch, it is ordered that:
  • 1. The respondent be reprimanded.
  • 2. The respondent do pay a fine to the Legal Practice Board
  • in the sum of $2,500 within 30 days.
  • 3. The respondent do pay the applicant’s costs of the
  • proceedings fixed in the sum of $4,500 within 30 days of
  • the date of this order.

The full bench of the WA Supreme Court ruled today that Mr Segler, who had a history of disciplinary issues, was unfit to remain on the roll of practitioners.

The judges said they had no confidence that Mr Segler could be relied upon to display the “candour, honesty and frankness” expected of a legal practitioner.

Stay Informed. It’s simple, free & convenient!
Categories: Builders Registration Act, Complaints against Lawyers, Inheritance (Family Independants Provision) Act 1972 (WA), Professional Misconduct
Tags: , , , , ,

Article Sources

Comments are closed.