Stephen Warne on professional negligence, regulation and discipline around the world

The Australian Professional Liability Blog random header image

Entries from November 2006

Solicitor succeeds on reliance on counsel defence

November 28th, 2006 · No Comments

Regent Leisuretime Limited v Skerrett [2006] EWCA 1184 is a lovely reliance on counsel case. You can read a precis here.

[Read more →]

Tags: Negligence · defences

Unrepresented woman ordered to pay costs of statute barred case

November 28th, 2006 · No Comments

Wells’s Case [2006] VCAT 2370 (Senior Member Howell, 16 November 2006)
Mrs Wells's case, also the subject of the previous post, was struck out under s. 75 of the VCAT Act, 1998 for having been brought out of time. Mr Howell found that the case was "lacking in substance" because it was statute barred and ordered [...]

[Read more →]

Tags: Negligence · VCAT Act · defences

Res judicata: VCAT strikes out case previously decided by Legal Profession Tribunal

November 27th, 2006 · No Comments

Wells's Case [2006] VCAT 2370 (Senior Member Howell, 16 November 2006)
I have always thought I was the only person in the world who held the view that an unsuccessful claimant in the Legal Profession Tribunal was not allowed, despite s. 133(2) of the Legal Practice Act, 1996 to have a second go in the courts, [...]

[Read more →]

Tags: Fair Trading Act · Legal Practice Act · Negligence · VCAT Act · defences · two bites at the cherry

The barrister and the trust monies saga ends in 6 month holiday

November 25th, 2006 · No Comments

Update: 14 October 2007  The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal, and the High Court refused special leave to appeal too, on 5 October 2007.
In Victorian Bar Inc v DAP, [2006] VCAT 2293 Judge Bowman, Tony Southall QC and T Harper suspended the barrister's practising certificate for 6 months and ordered him to pay [...]

[Read more →]

Tags: Discipline · Misconduct · costs · procedure · trust monies

The administration of justice ground for restraining solicitors from acting summarised

November 25th, 2006 · 1 Comment

In Geelong School Supplies Pty Ltd v Dean [2006] FCA 1404, the facts and outcome of which are described in the previous post, Justice Young went to some lengths to summarise the law on the third basis articulated by Brooking JA in Spincode for restraining solicitors from acting. The relevant parts of the decision are [...]

[Read more →]

Tags: Retainers · conflicts

Federal Court reiterates administration of justice as a ground for restraining solictiors from acting

November 25th, 2006 · 1 Comment

Geelong School Supplies Pty Ltd v Dean [2006] FCA 1404Justice Neil Young, who has just resigned after less than a year in the job as a Federal Court judge in order to return to the bar, took the exceptional step of restraining a solictor from continuing to act in order to protect the administration of [...]

[Read more →]

Tags: Uncategorized

Chairman, Full Legal Profession Tribunal criticised for abusing solicitor in misconduct prosecution

November 24th, 2006 · No Comments

In B (A Solicitor) v Victorian Lawyers RPA Ltd (2002) 6 VR 642 (Ormiston, Charles and Batt JJA), the majority criticised the Chairman of the Full Legal Profession Tribunal for retorting to the solicitor's submission that "These proceedings are a full time occupation for me" with "Occupation or obsession, Mr [G]?". They said it was [...]

[Read more →]

Tags: Discipline · Legal Practice Act · appeals · procedure

Procedural fairness: "Murray letters" considered by Victorian Court of Appeal

November 24th, 2006 · No Comments

B (A Solicitor) v Victorian Lawyers RPA Ltd (2002) 6 VR 642 (Ormiston, Charles and Batt JJA)
The Law Institute corresponded with the solicitors in this matter between 1998 and October 2000. The CEO Ian Dunn, wrote what is known in the game as "a Murray letter" on 16 October 2000. That is a letter summarising [...]

[Read more →]

Tags: "question of law" · Discipline · Legal Practice Act · Misconduct · appeals · natural justice · procedure · prosecutorial failures · prosecutors' duties · regulators' duties

The great delegation debacle: B (A solicitor) v Victorian Lawyers RPA Ltd

November 24th, 2006 · No Comments

B (A Solicitor) v Victorian Lawyers RPA Ltd (2002) 6 VR 642 (Ormiston, Charles and Batt JJA)
The Law Institute of Victoria Limited used to be named Victorian Lawyers RPA Ltd. It, and the Victorian Bar, were the only two RPAs (Recognised Professional Associations) set up under the Legal Practice Act, 1996, which allowed for an [...]

[Read more →]

Tags: Discipline · Legal Practice Act · jurisdiction · procedure · prosecutorial failures · regulators' duties

Bowman J suggests no power in Legal Profession Tribunal to reopen hearing

November 22nd, 2006 · No Comments

In K v Legal Services Board [2006] VCAT 2303 (see previous post) Bowman J was critical of, and did not follow Law Institute of Victoria Limited v Michel (T0211 of 2004), a decision of the Full Legal Profession Tribunal chaired by Judge Dee to grant a rehearing after having made a final order, on the [...]

[Read more →]

Tags: Uncategorized