Overview
LAWS13013 Legal Professional Conduct examines professional and personal conduct in respect of a practitioner’s duty to the law, the courts, clients and fellow practitioners. As part of the duty to clients this unit provides a basic knowledge of the principles relating to the holding of money on trust. This unit meets the LPAB requirements for ethics and professional responsibility.
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
Prerequisite:- LAWS11057 & LAWS11059
Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).
Offerings For Term 1 - 2018
Attendance Requirements
All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes – in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).
Recommended Student Time Commitment
Each 6-credit Undergraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 12.5 hours of study per week, making a total of 150 hours for the unit.
Class Timetable
Assessment Overview
Assessment Grading
This is a graded unit: your overall grade will be calculated from the marks or grades for each assessment task, based on the relative weightings shown in the table above. You must obtain an overall mark for the unit of at least 50%, or an overall grade of ‘pass’ in order to pass the unit. If any ‘pass/fail’ tasks are shown in the table above they must also be completed successfully (‘pass’ grade). You must also meet any minimum mark requirements specified for a particular assessment task, as detailed in the ‘assessment task’ section (note that in some instances, the minimum mark for a task may be greater than 50%). Consult the University’s Grades and Results Policy for more details of interim results and final grades.
All University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
You may wish to view these policies:
- Grades and Results Policy
- Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework)
- Review of Grade Procedure
- Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – Domestic Students
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – International Students
- Student Refund and Credit Balance Policy and Procedure
- Student Feedback – Compliments and Complaints Policy and Procedure
- Information and Communications Technology Acceptable Use Policy and Procedure
This list is not an exhaustive list of all University policies. The full list of University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
Feedback, Recommendations and Responses
Every unit is reviewed for enhancement each year. At the most recent review, the following staff and student feedback items were identified and recommendations were made.
Feedback from 'Have your say' survey open-ended responses.
The assignments were creative and informative and returned very quickly. Students were encouraged to use extra skills not normally associated with standard legal academic approaches.
Creative assignments which encourage students to develop anon-standard skills should be continued in the unit.
Feedback from 'Have your say' survey open-ended responses.
Allowing students a say in their choice of assessment enhances engagement.
The unit should continue to provide students with a choice of their assessment approach and the ability to create their own topic.
Feedback from 'Have your say' survey open-ended responses.
The experiential interview assignment was valuable and interesting, though difficult to implement initially.
The client interviewing exercise should be retained. A YouTube video should be created to further scaffold the interviewing exercise.
Feedback from 'Have your say' survey open-ended responses.
An invigilated exam is not the best approach as it interferes with work commitments, travel dilemmas and stress. Group work, discussion and debate may be a better approach.
Consideration be given to abandoning an invigilated examination in favour of an alternative form of assessment.
- Comprehend, analyse, and evaluate legislation and rules regulating professional and personal conduct in respect of a practitioner’s duty to the law, the courts, clients and fellow practitioners
- Compare and contrast the professional conduct rules in the United States with those in Australia
- Think creatively in researching and presenting an ethical issue to your peers
- Construct solutions to ethical issues involved with client interviewing
- Apply basic knowledge of the principles relating to the holding of money on trust.
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| 1 - Written Assessment - 40% | |||||
| 2 - Online Quiz(zes) - 40% | |||||
| 3 - Practical Assessment - 20% | |||||
Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes
| Graduate Attributes | Learning Outcomes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| 1 - Communication | |||||
| 2 - Problem Solving | |||||
| 3 - Critical Thinking | |||||
| 4 - Information Literacy | |||||
| 5 - Team Work | |||||
| 6 - Information Technology Competence | |||||
| 7 - Cross Cultural Competence | |||||
| 8 - Ethical practice | |||||
| 9 - Social Innovation | |||||
| 10 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures | |||||
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Graduate Attributes
| Assessment Tasks | Graduate Attributes | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
| 1 - Written Assessment - 40% | ||||||||||
| 2 - Online Quiz(zes) - 40% | ||||||||||
| 3 - Practical Assessment - 20% | ||||||||||
Textbooks
Ethics in Law: Lawyers' Responsibility and Accountability in Australia
Edition: 6th edn (2013)
Authors: Isaiah Ross
Butterworths Australia
Sydney Sydney , NSW , Australia
ISBN: 9780409332803
Binding: Paperback
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: Australian Guide to Legal Citation, 3rd ed
For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.
s.colbran@cqu.edu.au
Module/Topic
Accountability and Responsibility
Chapter
Ysaiah Ross, Ethics in Law: Lawyers’ Responsibility and Accountability in Australia (Lexis Nexis, 6th ed, 2014) Ch 1, 2, 3.
Anne Daley, What Is the Recent Evidence on an Excess Supply of Legal Qualifications in Australia? The Australian Economic Review, 2012, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 441–54 (available on Moodle site).
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
History, Structure and Regulation
Chapter
Ysaiah Ross, Ethics in Law: Lawyers’ Responsibility and Accountability in Australia (Lexis Nexis, 6th ed, 2014) Ch 4, 5.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Admission
Chapter
Ysaiah Ross, Ethics in Law: Lawyers’ Responsibility and Accountability in Australia (6th ed, 2014) Ch 6.
Mary Wyburn, ‘Disclosure of prior student academic misconduct in admission to legal practice: Lessons for universities and the courts' (2008) 8(2) QUTLJ 314-341. https://lr.law.qut.edu.au/article/view/46 (accessed 1 January, 2018).
Legal Profession Act 2009 (Qld) Ch 2.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Money Matters
Chapter
Costs and Liens
Gino Dal Pont, Lawyers’ Professional Responsibility in Australia and New Zealand (5th ed, 2013) Ch 14-16 extracts (referred to as ‘Lawyers Professional Responsibility’ 2013 Dal Pont Extracts on Moodle)
Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) Part 3.4
Trust Accounting
Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) - Part 3.3.
Legal Profession Regulation 2007 (Qld) - Part 3.3.
Queensland Law Society, Trust Accounting Guide. Trust money and trust accounts, The new legislation regime – Part 3.3 Legal Professional Act 2007 Version 2.0, 29-08-2009 (accessed 1 January 2018).
You may also find the following useful: Trust Accounting Resources from the Queensland Law Society Website <http://www.qls.com.au/For_the_profession/Practice_support/Resources/Trust_accounting_resources/Trust_accounting_FAQs> (accessed 1 January 2018).
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Discipline
Chapter
Ysaiah Ross, Ethics in Law: Lawyers’ Responsibility and Accountability in Australia (6th ed, 2014) Ch 7.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Duties of Representation
Chapter
Ysaiah Ross, Ethics in Law: Lawyers’ Responsibility and Accountability in Australia (Lexis Nexis, 6th ed, 2014) Ch 8.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Communication and Control
Chapter
Ysaiah Ross, Ethics in Law: Lawyers’ Responsibility and Accountability in Australia (Lexis Nexis, 6th ed, 2014) Ch 9.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Competence and Care
Chapter
Ysaiah Ross, Ethics in Law: Lawyers’ Responsibility and Accountability in Australia (6th ed, 2014) Ch 10, 11.
Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) Parts 3.4, 3.5.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Confidentiality
Chapter
Ysaiah Ross, Ethics in Law: Lawyers’ Responsibility and Accountability in Australia (6th ed, 2014) Ch 11.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Conflicts of Interest
Chapter
Ysaiah Ross, Ethics in Law: Lawyers’ Responsibility and Accountability in Australia (6th ed, 2014) Ch 12.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
The Adversarial System
Chapter
Ysaiah Ross, Ethics in Law: Lawyers’ Responsibility and Accountability in Australia (6th ed, 2014) Ch 13, 14, 15.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Conclusion
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
1 Written Assessment
This assessment is designed to develop your creativity, challenge your personal moral beliefs and ability to locate and critique primary and secondary materials in relation to an ethical dilemma of your own creation. Your task is to prepare a visual scenario on an ethical issue related to legal work that you personally find morally repugnant. Your visual scenario may be presented as a:
- comic strip;
- animation (2d or 3d);
- infographic;
- storyboard for a scene in a film, including images; or
- film of no more than 3 minutes duration.
Your visual scenario should be no more than the equivalent of 1000 words (most likely much less). It will be challenging to produce, so make sure you start early. In addition to your visual scenario you are also asked to prepare a 1000 word written summary of the legal and ethical issues involved.
Examples of legal work you may find repugnant may include, but are in no way limited to:
· Formation of a corporation that promotes paedophilia.
· Evicting a tenant, who is in hospital, unable to work and pay the rent.
· Creating a will that leaves all the assets to the old dog’s home rather than to impoverished close relatives who have cared for the client for a long period.
· Defending a person whom you believe, although not certain is guilty of manslaughter or murder.
· Conducting a civil litigation for a mining corporation against an environmental organisation trying to save the Great Barrier Reef.
· Defending a client who was forced out of necessity and to avoid starvation, killed and ate a fellow survivor of an accident at sea.
· Defending a potential serial killer, who in interview with you disclosed the location of other victims.
· A mortgagee exercising power of sale over a charities homeless shelter.
Issues to Address:
· Why you find the instructions repugnant?
· How you will deal with the client in meeting the terms of your retainer?
· Critique the relevant professional rules (or lack thereof), case law and secondary literature concerning the ethical issue in your script.
The assessment will be judged according to the requirements of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld), the Legal Profession Regulation 2007 (Qld), the Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules 2012, case law and relevant literature (including a brief comparison with a United States jurisdiction) according the Assessment Criteria Rubric.
Software which you may find useful in producing your visual presentation include, but are not limited to:
Comic:
Animation/film:
CrazyTalk Animator Pro 3
Moho Professional 12
Infographic
http://www.creativebloq.com/infographic/tools-2131971
Storyboard
http://www.storyboardthat.com - includes image library
We will be holding a visual (film, comic, animation, infographic etc) festival in week 9 where students will be able to display their work online for their peers to consider.
Week 7 Monday (23 Apr 2018) 11:59 pm AEST
Week 9 Friday (11 May 2018)
Assessment Criteria Rubric
| Scenario (15) | |||||
| HD | D | C | P | F | |
| Structure 2 | The scenario was very well structured. Clear and well organised sequence of events. | The scenario had a good structure. Clear sequence of events. | The scenario has generally good structure. | The scenario had some structure. | The scenario was unstructured. |
| Organisation 3 | The flow of the scenario is logical and very coherent. | Information is well organised and logical. | Most information is well organised and generally logical. | Some information is poorly organised and at times does not flow logically. | Information is poorly organised or does not flow logically. |
| Creativity 10 | The scenario is highly creative and demonstrates numerous fresh, original and inventive ideas. | The scenario is moderately creative and demonstrates some novel ideas. | The scenario displays some evidence of originality and inventiveness. | The scenario displays an extensive collection of existing ideas. Little evidence of new thought or inventiveness. | The scenario displays minimal or no creativity and is a rehash of others ideas. No evidence or new thought. |
| Written summary (25) | |||||
| Content, evidence and argument 15 | Thoroughly addresses all aspects of the topic. All relevant information is included. Information is well analysed and interpreted correctly. Extensive critical appraisal of the law and secondary literature. Strong, cohesive argument backed up with evidence. Original and/or novel observations. | The summary addresses key aspects of the topic. Few omissions in information or misinterpretations of the law or secondary literature. Argument is strong and backed up with some relevant evidence of strengths and weaknesses of the law. Good evidence of critical analysis. Well-synthesised and coherent argumentation and observation and evidence. Some novel observations and original thinking. | The summary addresses the selected topic. Some minor omissions in information and misinterpretation of the law. Looks at the strengths and weaknesses of the law and associated secondary literature. Some evidence of critical analysis. Argument is cohesive and backed up with some evidence. Some original observations. | Some parts of the summary do not address the selected topic. Some major omissions in information and misinterpretation of the law or secondary literature. Some errors in deduction. Some cohesive argument. Few original observations. | The summary does not address the selected topic. Crucial omissions in information. Serious misinterpretation of the law or secondary sources. Serious errors in deduction. Argument is weak or non-existent. No original observations. |
| Style and format 3 | The summary is cohesively written. Clear format. No grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors. Excellent use of English language. Excellent layout. | The summary is well written. Some minor grammatical, spelling and/or punctuation errors. Good use of English language. Well laid out. | Some grammatical, spelling and/or punctuation errors. English expression is sound. | A number of grammatical, spelling and/or punctuation errors. Some problems with English expression. Not well layed out. | Large number of grammatical, spelling and/or punctuation errors. The reflection contains English construction that is incomprehensible. Poor layout. |
| Sources 5 | A moderate number of sources and references, including seminal and recent articles from peer-reviewed literature. A variety of references are used. All sources are acknowledged and well referenced. | A moderate number of highly relevant sources and references used. References come from a variety of sources. Sources are acknowledged. | A moderate number of sources and references used. References come from a variety in the type of references used, especially articles from peer-reviewed journals. Mostly relevant sources used. Sources are acknowledged. | A small number of sources and references used. References come from a limited number of sources – some not relevant to the task. Some sources are not appropriately acknowledged. | Very few (4) sources and references used. References come from only one source or solely grey literature, personal anecdotes without critique. Incomplete acknowledgment or the work of other. |
| References 2 | Meticulous attention to referencing conventions. | Good and consistent use of referencing style. | Referencing style is sound and mostly consistent | Referencing style is at times poor and/or inconsistent in style. | Referencing style is very poor. |
No submission method provided.
- Comprehend, analyse, and evaluate legislation and rules regulating professional and personal conduct in respect of a practitioner’s duty to the law, the courts, clients and fellow practitioners
- Compare and contrast the professional conduct rules in the United States with those in Australia
- Communication
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Information Literacy
- Cross Cultural Competence
- Ethical practice
2 Online Quiz(zes)
There will be two quizzes in this unit.
Quiz 1 Instructions
The quiz will be of 90 min duration and will have a total of 30 questions consisting of 6 questions from each of the weeks 1 through to and including week 5.
The quiz will be in multiple-choice format with 6 choices per question. Some questions have one correct answer, others will require multiple components to be selected to constitute a correct answer. Each question will indicate the number of responses required to constitute a correct answer.
Quiz 1 will be available from 5am AEST on the 16th of April 2018 to 11.59 pm AEST on the 17th of April 2018. Make sure you start and complete the 90 min quiz within that time period. Once you start the quiz you must complete it within 90 min, otherwise some of your answers will not be saved.
You will receive a mark out of 20 (30x.667) representing 20% of your grade for this unit. You are allowed one attempt.
Quiz 2 Instructions
The quiz will be of 90 min duration and will have a total of 30 questions consisting of 5 questions from each of the weeks 6 through to and including week 11.
The quiz will be in multiple-choice format with 6 choices per question. Some questions have one correct answer, others will require multiple components to be selected to constitute a correct answer. Each question will indicate the number of responses required to constitute a correct answer.
Quiz 2 will be available from 5 am AEST on the 28th of May 2018 to 11.59 pm AEST on the 29th of May 2018. Make sure you start and complete the 90 min quiz within that time period. Once you start the quiz you must complete it within 90 min, otherwise some of your answers will not be saved.
You will receive a mark out of 20 (30x.667) representing 20% of your grade for this unit. You are allowed one attempt.
2
Other
Week 6 Tuesday (17 Apr 2018) 11:59 pm AEST
Note this information is only for quiz one. There is a second quiz in week 12.
Week 6 Tuesday (17 Apr 2018)
Answering the Quiz questions correctly.
- Comprehend, analyse, and evaluate legislation and rules regulating professional and personal conduct in respect of a practitioner’s duty to the law, the courts, clients and fellow practitioners
- Apply basic knowledge of the principles relating to the holding of money on trust.
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Ethical practice
3 Practical Assessment
No Assessment Task Description
Week 12 Wednesday (30 May 2018) 11:00 pm AEST
Review/Exam Week Monday (4 June 2018)
Instructions on how to complete the Client Interviewing Exercise
The exercise is to be completed in three parts:
1. Students will nominate a team of three by the start of week 5 (2nd April 2018), in default of which unallocated students will be assigned teams by 6th April 2018.
2. Conduct of the three interviews on or before 18th May 2018.
3. Written reflection due for submission on 4th June 2018.
Part 1- The three interviews
Students will form into teams of three (either self-nominated or assigned). One student will play the role of a client, another the interviewer and the third student will be an observer. The process will be repeated three times by the group using different interview scenarios, enabling each group member to play each respective role. Each interview should take 15-20 minutes to complete. It is suggested that the three interviews be conducted in one hour long session.
The unit coordinator will email you with your role in each interview and the supporting confidential information. Students must not exchange with other students the confidential information they have been provided.
The interviews will occur at a time agreed to by your group members, but must be completed on or before 18th May 2018. This will enable group members sufficient time to write their written reflection. Each of the interviews should be conducted over the Internet using Zoom. Sessions should be recorded using Zoom by the student observing the interview as that student will be writing a report on their observations in part 2 of this exercise. Having a recording is a useful method to review what happened.
Part 2- Written reflection
Each student will be graded on their written reflection of their experience as an observer. After e-submitting their reflections, as a single pdf document, students will then exchange them with the other members of their group. The written reflection should not exceed 1200 words.
The reflection should address the following issues:
· Describe the character of the client. Were they easy or difficult to interview? Why?
· What techniques did the interviewer use to overcome any problems associated with the interview?
· Who was in control of the interview and how was that control established and manifest?
· Was there any noticeable body language, gestures, oral characteristics displayed by either the client or interviewer?
· How were the questions framed - open or closed questioning? Was this appropriate in the circumstances of the interview?
· Did the interviewer display empathy with the client's situation?
· Was the interview mechanical and following a checklist?
· What other techniques should the interviewer have adopted to improve their interviewing skills.
· What additional questions should the interviewer have asked?
· Did the interviewer stay on point or were they distracted by the client towards irrelevant considerations?
· What have you learnt about client interviewing having observed the process?
The final version of your written reflection must be submitted as a single PDF using 'e-Submission'. No consideration will be given to content which exceeds the 1200 word limit. When uploading your file make sure that you adopt the following naming convention: "<student number>_<surname>_LAWS13013_Interview.pdf" e.g. 16789909_Bloggs_LAWS13013_Interview.pdf
- Comprehend, analyse, and evaluate legislation and rules regulating professional and personal conduct in respect of a practitioner’s duty to the law, the courts, clients and fellow practitioners
- Think creatively in researching and presenting an ethical issue to your peers
- Construct solutions to ethical issues involved with client interviewing
- Communication
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Ethical practice
As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.
Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.
When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.
Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.
As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.
What is a breach of academic integrity?
A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.
Why is academic integrity important?
A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.
Where can I get assistance?
For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.
What can you do to act with integrity?
