purplehazel

purplehazel

1p

1 comments posted · 0 followers · following 0

12 years ago @ The Australian Profess... - Links to the states' a... · 0 replies · +1 points

I agree with Padric - if you you have even the slightest doubt about disclosing something disclose it in full and let the Board decide whether they really needed to know about it.

In this instance it seems pretty clear that they would want to be told so they can decide what to make of the offences - Practice Direction No. 4 of 2009 - DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS FOR APPLICANTS FOR ADMISSION TO PRACTICE available on the Supreme court website. http://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/wps/wcm/connec...

"Traffic Offences
Traffic offences such as speeding, careless driving, driving an unregistered vehicle and drink driving should be disclosed. For minor traffic offences it will normally be sufficient to disclose the date, the offence, including the speed or breath alcohol content if relevant, the penalty and confirmation of payment of any fine imposed."

They may well be quite forgiving if the offences are old. However, the other Board - Legal Services Board - has this to say in the context of a decision to grant, renew, amend, suspend or cancel a local practising certificate [which will usually involve looking at recent behaviour - since the last certificate or since admission if it's the first certificate] See ‘Fit and Proper person’ policy statement at http://www.lsb.vic.gov.au/Publications.htm

14.3 Traffic offences
The Board will usually disregard a finding of guilt for the following traffic offences:
speeding or careless driving
driving in an unregistered or uninsured vehicle
drink-driving or drug-driving
unless:
it is a second or subsequent offence
the circumstances of the offence indicate the possibility of mental impairment (including alcoholism or drug dependence).
http://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/wps/wcm/connec...