Kristina Kothrakis
This is a real case study by one of our lawyers. The person who is in charge of this area in the firm is Kristina Kothrakis. Kristina is a Director and LIV Accredited Criminal Law Specialist at Doogue + George, recognised by Doyle's Guide as a Leading Criminal Defence Lawyer in Victoria (2026). With over 18 years of experience, she acts in sexual offences, family violence, white collar crime, fraud, and ASIC and IBAC investigations.
View full profile →This is a case study on obtaining property by deception at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court, where the client received a fine without conviction, protecting her nursing registration.
Our client was involved in a motor vehicle accident. This meant that she was unable to resume normal duties and was unable to work at all for a period of time. She required income assistance from the Transport Accident Commission (TAC).
What is alleged to have occured?
Our client was involved in a motor vehicle accident. This meant that she was unable to resume normal duties and was unable to work at all for a period of time. She required income assistance from the Transport Accident Commission (TAC).
What happened at court?
Our client was incredibly concerned about receiving a criminal conviction because she works as a nurse and is also in aged care. She was concerned about the impact a conviction would have on her ability to maintain her registration as a nurse as well as on her future employment prospects. She had no prior convictions and we were able to obtain a number of character references, some of which were from her current place of employment, which attested to her normally being of good character.
Submissions were made as to the challenges she faced when she was injured and the financial pressure she was under at the time. Submissions were also made as to the potential effect of this event on her future.
What was the result?
The magistrate was ultimately persuaded to impose a fine without conviction for Obtaining Property By Deception. Our client was also ordered to pay TAC’s professional costs and to pay compensation. She was given 3 months to pay the fine and costs and was asked to enter into an agreement with TAC in regards to payment of the compensation.
DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 27/07/2016
