Professional Conduct Tribunal

Advanced Search

The Institute’s education and training pathway is the preferred choice for industry professionals.

Chartered Accountants Program

Training and Development

Considering a career as a Chartered Accountant? Looking for the next step in your professional life?

Students

The Institute is leading the debate in the areas that matter most to business and the accounting profession.

Leadership

Government Relations and Lobbying

The Institute produces an invaluable suite of tools, guidance, products and services to help members in their work.

Technical, Professional and Specialist

Specialised, professional tools, latest insights and news on all accounting topics, to help you stay informed and get the job done. More >

Member Complaints & Discipline General Information Types Of Matters The Institute Can Investigate How to Make A Complaint The Complaint Process Complaints Relating to Fees and/or Fee Disputes Complaints Relating to Ownership and Possession of Books and Records Contact Details for Complaints Fees and other matters – FAQ’s Disciplinary Policy Paper Disciplinary Process - FAQs Tribunal Decisions

Professional Conduct Tribunal - June

Print this Article

Email this Article

11 June 2008

Robert Eugene Murphy FCA of Queensland

On his own admission the Tribunal found a case established that Mr Murphy was liable to disciplinary action in accordance with By-law 40(e), in that on 4 April 2007 the Companies Auditors and Liquidators Disciplinary Board, being satisfied on the application of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) that he had failed, within the meaning of section 1292(2)(d) of the Corporations Act to carry out or perform adequately and properly the duties of a liquidator and the duties and functions required by an Australian law to be carried out or performed by a registered liquidator, ordered on 8 June 2007 that:

he be reprimanded; and

that he give an undertaking that he will, within 12 months after the order takes effect (in addition to the normal requirements for continuing professional development), undertake and satisfactorily complete a course approved in advance by ASIC dealing with the conduct of meetings and in particular the functions and duties of the chairman of a meeting.</li

The decision of the Tribunal was that, having regard to the penalties imposed by the CALDB and Mr Murphy’s consent to fulfil training obligations required by the CALDB, Mr Murphy be reprimanded. The Tribunal also ordered that Mr Murphy be required to pay $800 plus GST towards the costs of the disciplinary action, and that notification be given to specified professional bodies and regulatory authorities.

11 June 2008

Brian James Hooker CA of Queensland

On his own admission the Tribunal found a case established that Mr Hooker was liable to disciplinary action in accordance with:

Bylaw 40(e), in that on 24 July 2007 he was disqualified from managing corporations under subsection 206F(3) of the Corporations Act 2001 for a period of five years without leave of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.

By-law 40(h), in that on 27 June 2007 he became a bankrupt.

The decision of the Tribunal was that, having regard to the five year disqualification imposed by ASIC from managing corporations under the provisions of the Corporations Act, Mr Hooker’s membership of the Institute be cancelled until 24 July 2012, being the date on which the ASIC disqualification expires. The Tribunal also ordered that Mr Hooker be required to pay $800 plus GST towards the costs of the disciplinary action.