VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
administrative DIVISION
Legal Practice LIST	vcat reference No. J23/2022
	
CATCHWORDS	
Legal Practice – previous findings of three counts of unsatisfactory professional conduct in respect of caveats lodged by solicitor – agreement reached as to proposed penalty orders and costs – proposed orders appropriate –  Legal Profession Uniform Law (Victoria).	

APPLICANT	Victorian Legal Services Commissioner	
RESPONDENT	Hubert Fong	
WHERE HELD	Melbourne	
BEFORE	E Wentworth, Senior Member	
HEARING TYPE	Penalty decision on the papers 	
DATE OF ORDER	21 May 2024	
CITATION	Victorian Legal Services Commissioner v Fong (Legal Practice) [2024] VCAT 469	

Orders by consent
1	The Tribunal, having found the respondent guilty of three charges of unsatisfactory professional conduct, imposes the following penalty as a global penalty in respect of all three charges:
(a)	The respondent is reprimanded.
(b)	The respondent is to pay a fine in the sum of $3,000, to be paid within 60 days of the date of the final orders in the Proceeding.
2	Pursuant to s 303 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (Victoria), the respondent is to pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to this proceeding fixed in the sum of $5,000 payable within seven days of the final orders in the proceeding.

E Wentworth
Senior Member			

Reasons
1	On 8 February 2024, I delivered reasons for decision on liability in this proceeding, in which I found the respondent had engaged in unsatisfactory professional conduct on three occasions (charges 1,2 and 3): See Victorian Legal Services Commissioner v Fong (Legal Practice) [2024] VCAT 103.
2	The parties then agreed that the penalty hearing and any application for costs should be conducted ‘on the papers’ pursuant to s100 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 (Vic).
3	On 8 May 2024, the parties provided proposed consent orders to the Tribunal that an appropriate penalty is as follows:
(i)	The Tribunal impose a global penalty.
(ii)	The respondent is reprimanded.
(iii)	The respondent pay a fine in the sum of $3,000.
(iv)	The respondent pay the applicant’s costs fixed in the amount of 5,000.00
4	The Tribunal did not require the parties to provide additional submissions in support of the proposed penalty orders, which were communicated in March 2024.  Nor are submissions required in respect of the proposed costs orders.
5	I am satisfied that the orders proposed by the parties as to penalty are appropriate in this case and will address, so far as needed, the well-established principles and purposes of penalty orders in legal professional disciplinary cases.  The parties are to be commended on facilitating a cost-effective, efficient, and appropriate resolution of this matter.

E Wentworth
Senior Member