Triumph of remorse

Rehabilitation through admission … Admissions Board in Queensland loses five year battle to keep applicant off the jam roll … Court of Appeal smiles kindly on 66-year-old with an "unsatisfactory past" … Peta Smith reports 

Cohen v Legal Practitioners Admissions Board

In March Philip Cohen, 66, was admitted as a legal practitioner in Queensland after being repeatedly refused a place on the jam roll since 2007. 

The admission board's reasons for its insistent opposition to Cohen's application included his criminal history, bankruptcy, driving record, his attitude to company directorships and the dealings of his company, College of Financial Studies Pty Ltd.

In 2009, Cohen twice applied to the board for admission, but both attempts were opposed - the board noting: 

"The applicant needs to demonstrate objectively a general change in attitude beyond his own say so." 

In 2010, Cohen unsuccessfully sought to do pro bono work at community legal centres, but was knocked back because he was not a qualified solicitor. 

He assisted the DPP in a matter which led to the conviction of an offender. In December that year, his application was again opposed, the court saying: 

"The burden of the applicant's past is a heavy burden in this context and the burden of demonstrating suitability, notwithstanding, is therefore proportionately heavy."

Cohen began working for a Southport solicitor, Michael Dwyer, without pay. Dwyer recommended to the court that he be admitted.  

That application again was opposed by the board, and the court concluded that any evidence submitted in regard to Cohen's suitability should be in an affidavit so that the statements could be tested in cross-examination. 

In September 2011, Kerry Douglas, the principal at a firm where Cohen gave free legal assistance, provided an affidavit recommending his admission. 

Her statements survived lengthy cross-examination by Alan MacSporran for the board. 

Douglas said that Cohen conducted himself professionally and expressed remorse for his past conduct.

Reasons for the decision in March came down on April 20, from McMurdo, Applegarth and P. Lyons.  McMurdo P said:

"What can be said in Mr Cohen's favour on the issue of disclosure to the board is that, at least since 2009, it has been full and frank. He has shown persistence, resilience and determination in attempting to satisfy this court of the rightly stringent suitability requirements for admission which followed from his unsatisfactory past … 

More recently. he has obtained employment with Kerry Smith Douglas Lawyers although only for a period of six weeks. I would have been more readily persuaded of Mr Cohen's suitability had he worked for Ms Douglas for a greater period … 

There is no reason not to accept Ms Douglas's evidence that he is diligent, hardworking and competent and that he now has insight into his past failings and an appreciation of why this court has been cautious in admitting him to practice." 

It's heartening that a place can be found in the profession for bad drivers. Desperate persistence is its own reward. 

Peta Smith reporting ...