Unlicensed barrister Madeleine Betro fined by Supreme Court, but allowed to continue practising law under supervision

Once considered a “rising star” in the legal profession, this lawyer has now learned her fate after failing to renew her practising certificate, but acting for clients anyway.

A barrister who had been practising without a licence for several months – but still representing clients – has been handed a fine, ordered to undertake supervision with a senior lawyer and had her licence backdated.

In the Supreme Court on Thursday morning, justices Chris Bleby, Laura Stein and Ben Doyle handed down their judgment in the disciplinary matter brought by the Legal Profession Conduct Commission against barrister Madeleine Betro.

Ms Betro – once named a rising star in the legal industry and the wife of aspiring Liberal MP Scott Kennedy – had repeatedly failed to renew her practising licence.

She practised law without a licence for seven months between July 2024 and February 2025.

She failed to renew her $745 certificate despite repeated emails from the Law Society and Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner Anthony Keane.

Ms Betro only stopped working, the court heard, when Mr Keane personally “confronted her” in court, face-to-face, “with her failures”.

Last week, she apologised for her “carelessness” and asked she be granted a retrospective licence, fined and ordered to undertake supervised mentoring for a period of time.

On Thursday, Justice Bleby said that despite her wrongdoing being “serious”, there was good reason to impose the fine and grant her permission to obtain a new practising certificate.

Madeleine Betro and her husband, Liberal candidate for Morialta Scott Kennedy. Pic Roy VanDerVegt

“Although the practitioner’s failings are serious, in view of the explanation she has given, and the way that she has responded to the revelation during the succeeding four months that she has been unable to practice, there is no reason to doubt the practitioner’s fitness to practice,” Justice Bleby said.

He said the disciplinary procedure, the public scrutiny in the case and the positive steps she has taken throughout the period she was not practising, meant a fine was sufficient to ensure public confidence in the profession.

According to legislation, the maximum fine is the equivalent to what the renewal fee for a legal practising certificate for at least six months would have been.

The Law Society of South Australia lists that renewal fee – for a licence of six months or more – to be $723, plus a $227 levy.

“In this case, the imposition of a fine, the imposition of conditions, and the expression of the courts disapprobation are, in the court’s opinion, sufficient to convey to the practitioner and profession the importance of relevant obligations, and to ensure public confidence in the maintenance of appropriate professional standards,” Justice Bleby said.

He said that a number of conditions would be imposed on her and she must be supervised upon returning to practice.

He said that, on the condition that Ms Betro pays the maximum fine, obtains insurance and pays all other relevant fees, her practising certificate, taking effect from July 1 last year, would be issued.

The court also imposed the condition that she remain under supervision by a senior lawyer, to help manage her workload and her emails, and meet with her no less than once a month.

Ms Betro was also ordered to complete the LSSA law practice management course by June next year, as well as undertake a three-hour professional development and business skill training.

Those conditions will remain in place until June 30, 2026, unless the Law Society of South Australia applies to have them extended.

Originally published as Unlicensed barrister Madeleine Betro fined by Supreme Court, but allowed to continue practising law under supervision