Temeka Sue-Tin is a solicitor in the Maroochydore office on the Sunshine Coast. Temeka holds a Bachelor of Laws from Griffith University and a Graduate Diploma of Legal Practice from the College of Law. She is admitted to practice in the Supreme Court of Queensland and in the High Court of Australia.
Temeka completed her Practical Legal Training at GTC Lawyers. She has strong interests in criminal and traffic law, family law, civil law and succession law.
Outside of work, Temeka enjoys going to the beach or the park with her dog and spending time with family and friends.
Accreditations & Memberships
- Member of the Law Society of Queensland
- Member of the Sunshine Coast Law Association
- Member of Sunshine Coast Young Lawyers
Success Stories and Publications
Our solicitor Temeka Sue-Tin represented the wife in a family law matter that involved a substantial amount of debt. The husband’s legal team initiated proceedings seeking orders for the parties to share the debt. The husband’s legal team subsequently withdrew from the proceedings and the husband continued unrepresented.
The matter was listed for a Conciliation Conference at the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. After lengthy negotiations at the Conference, Ms Sue-Tin was able to convince the husband to agree to take the debt, including the shortfall on the mortgage and to indemnify the wife. This was the outcome the client had hoped to achieve and the agreement avoided the need for the matter to proceed to a trial.
Our solicitor Temeka Sue-Tin represented a client who pleaded guilty to a number of drug-related offences. The client was the sole income earner for his young family and his business was at risk if a conviction was recorded as he would be unable to hold the necessary Queensland Building and Construction Commission licence.
Ms Sue-Tin made submissions in relation to why the Magistrate should exercise the discretion not to record a conviction. The client was sentenced to a substantial fine and no conviction was recorded.
Our solicitor Temeka Sue-Tin represented a client who was charged with an aggravated offence of contravening a Domestic Violence Order, in breach of an existing probation order for a similar offence committed less than a year before. In the circumstances, the client was at risk of serving an actual period of imprisonment.
At sentencing, Ms Sue-Tin made submissions that a further period of probation would be of utility to the client and the appropriate sentence. The Magistrate sentenced the client to a further 12 months’ probation.
Our solicitor Temeka Sue-Tin represented the mother in a parenting matter. The children lived with the mother and spent time with the father, and the father initiated proceedings seeking a change of residence, with the children to live with him and spend time with the mother. After negotiations at the first hearing date, Ms Sue-Tin was able to reach an agreement for final orders by consent for the parents to share equal care of the children. This agreement avoided the need for the matter to proceed to further hearing dates.
The client sent Ms Sue-Tin the following message, “Thank you for being up front, straight to the point and no messing around… Thank you for also realising that the orders need to be very specific and detailed due to the communication issues. I really really appreciate how you knew I didn’t want a long drawn out Court battle.”
Our solicitor Temeka Sue-Tin represented a client charged with Assault Occasioning Bodily Harm. The assault consisted of punching a colleague twice in the face, wrestling him to the ground and continuing to punch him while he was on the ground until being pulled away by other persons. The victim sustained bruising and swelling to the left side of his face and a laceration to the upper lip.
Ms Sue-Tin advised the client to obtain character references and seek assistance for his mental health issues. The case law suggested that even for an offender with no criminal history, a period of actual imprisonment was within range. Ms Sue-Tin made detailed submissions regarding the mitigating factors and provided case law to persuade the court to impose a more lenient penalty than actual imprisonment. The Magistrate accepted the submissions and sentenced the client to 6 months imprisonment, wholly suspended for 18 months.