A man was acquitted of criminal charges. The prosecution’s appeal failed. He complained about the police’s lawyers’ conduct to South Australia’s Bureau de Spank, the Legal Practitioner Conduct Commissioner. The Commissioner dismissed the complaint. There was a statutory right of appeal in respect of some but not all categories of decisions at the conclusion of a […]
Entries Tagged as 'judicial review'
Updates, 13 June and 24 October 2012: See now Hagipantelis v Legal Services Commissioner of New South Wales  NSWCA 79 from  and Legal Profession Complaints Committee v Masten  WASAT 47. Original post: The Building Practitioners Board is the Bureau de Spank for builders. It initiated an inquiry into whether a builder had […]
Update, 18 July 2008: Make that a $200,000, not $20,000, loan from rock impressario Michael Gudinski. I like the way he gave evidence to VCAT’s Legal Practice List by mobile phone from a US Billy Joel concert. Leonie Wood’s report for The Age is here. Update, 15 July 2008: Apparently the Law Institute’s trust account […]
Update, 2 September 2010: Just noticed this and thought to store it away here as potentially interesting: http://jade.barnet.com.au/Jade.html#article=229752. Update, 7 August 2010: The saga continues. See this post. Update, 17 June 2008: The Age has caught up with this story. It’s a funny old article. Weirdest is this comment ‘A prominent senior counsel said the […]
The latest and possibly last chapter in the tribulations of Victoria’s most senior female silk is to be found in M v VCAT  VSC 89, a decision of Justice Mandie. The barrister was charged on 4 July 2005 with 24 charges of misconduct, and ended up after a hearing of the first half of […]
Tags: Abuse of process · amendment · Discipline · duty to court · Ethics · judicial review · Legal Practice Act · litigation ethics · Misconduct · procedure · prosecutorial failures · prosecutors' duties · reckless disregard for rules
Kabourakis v Medical Practitioners Board of Victoria  VSC 493 (Gillard J) Justice Gillard said doctors get no res judicata and allowed the doctors’ regulator to fix a bungled prosecution following a complaint by deciding to investigate the matter already decided under its power to investigate of its own volition.