CONDITION FOR REMOVAL FROM ROLL: PROVEN CRIMINAL MISCONDUCT

The Council of the New South Wales Bar Association v Franklin (No 2) [2014] NSWCA 428 (12 December 2014) (Beazley P at [1]; Meagher JA at [2]; Leeming JA at [48]) This decision has a headnote. CatchwordsLEGAL PRACTITIONERS - removal from roll of local lawyers - application to have lawyer's name removed from roll - where lawyer convicted of criminal offences including aggravated sexual assault - where lawyer denied that he committed the offences of which he was convicted, both at trial and at sentencing hearing - whether of good fame and character - whether guilty of professional misconduct - whether presently a fit and proper person - Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW), s 32 Supreme Court of Victoria DURA (AUSTRALIA) CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD v HUE BOUTIQUE LIVING PTY LTD (NO 5) [2014] VSC 400 (15 December 2014) (DIXON J) CatchwordsPractice and Procedure – Overarching obligation not to make a claim or a response to a claim without a proper basis – Whether breached by solicitor for losing party – Liability of solicitor for wasted costs – Requirement that solicitor’s conduct be unreasonable – Briefing of experts – Preparation of witness statements – Investigation of factual basis for a claim - Discretionary considerations in wasted costs jurisdiction – Discretionary considerations under s 29 Civil Procedure Act – Whether solicitor entitled to benefit of a doubt because claims of client legal privilege not waived – Whether relevant privileged communication established – ss 18, 22, 23, 29, 42 Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic) – r 63.23 Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005. Legal Practitioners – Overarching obligation not to make a claim or a response to a claim without a proper basis – Whether breached by solicitor for losing party – Liability of solicitor for wasted costs – Requirement that solicitor’s conduct be unreasonable – Briefing of experts – Preparation of witness statements – Investigation of factual basis for a claim – Discretionary considerations in wasted costs jurisdiction – Discretionary considerations under s 29 Civil Procedure Act – Whether solicitor entitled to benefit of a doubt because claims of client legal privilege not waived – Whether relevant privileged communication established – ss 18, 22, 23, 29, 42 Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic) – r 63.23 Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules, 2005.