In what is, quite possibly, the most ironic case of exam-cheating ever recorded, an Australian lawyer has been struck down after being found guilty of cheating on his ethics exam
In what is possibly the most ironic case of exam-cheating ever recorded, an Australian lawyer has been struck off the roll after cheating on his ethics exam.
Hendrick Jan van Es was found to be ''not a fit and proper person'' to remain on the Supreme Court's local roll of lawyers, according to local media reports, because he snuck extra notes, tucked down his trousers, into an ''ethics for barristers'' examination.
Invigilator Christopher D'Aeth initially spotted Hendrick Jan van Es taking an "unusually large" bundle of papers into his ethics assessment. When D'Aeth asked van Es to let him inspect his notes, van Es refused. D'Aeth told him his only other option was to leave and Van Es walked out of the exam hall.
However, CCTV footage shows that, once outside, van Es separated his documents and tucked some of them down his trousers underneath his jumper.
He then attempted to re-enter the examination room but was refused.
At a meeting with the NSW Bar Association three days later, van Es first denied having brought unauthorised material into the exam, but admitted his dishonesty when confronted with the CCTV footage.
In a letter to the Bar Association's executive director, van Es later wrote: "I am ashamed of my actions."
He was subsequently ordered to pay costs of A$11,000.
Hendrick Jan van Es was found to be ''not a fit and proper person'' to remain on the Supreme Court's local roll of lawyers, according to local media reports, because he snuck extra notes, tucked down his trousers, into an ''ethics for barristers'' examination.
Invigilator Christopher D'Aeth initially spotted Hendrick Jan van Es taking an "unusually large" bundle of papers into his ethics assessment. When D'Aeth asked van Es to let him inspect his notes, van Es refused. D'Aeth told him his only other option was to leave and Van Es walked out of the exam hall.
However, CCTV footage shows that, once outside, van Es separated his documents and tucked some of them down his trousers underneath his jumper.
He then attempted to re-enter the examination room but was refused.
At a meeting with the NSW Bar Association three days later, van Es first denied having brought unauthorised material into the exam, but admitted his dishonesty when confronted with the CCTV footage.
In a letter to the Bar Association's executive director, van Es later wrote: "I am ashamed of my actions."
He was subsequently ordered to pay costs of A$11,000.
