'The Legal Practitioner' v The Council Of The Law Society Of The Act

'THE LEGAL PRACTITIONER'
v
THE COUNCIL OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF THE ACT
[2018] HCASL 340
C9/2018

This application for special leave to appeal does not advance any question of law that would justify the grant of special leave to appeal nor does it disclose any reason to doubt the correctness of the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The application for special leave should be dismissed. The applicant has not indicated any basis on which the interests of justice would be served by granting him an adjournment for the purposes of supplementing his application.
Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

P.A. Keane
14 November 2018
J.J. Edelman

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, 'The Legal Practitioner', sought special leave to appeal a decision made by the Council of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory. This case involved a dispute regarding the legal practitioner's conduct and the Council's disciplinary action against him. The matter was heard in the High Court of Australia. The court was required to determine whether special leave to appeal should be granted, considering whether the application raised a question of law of general public importance or if there were any doubts about the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision.

The court considered the grounds of appeal presented by the applicant and concluded that they did not disclose any question of law that would justify the grant of special leave. The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated any basis on which the interests of justice would be served by granting an adjournment to supplement the application. The Court of Appeal's decision was deemed to be correct and no doubts were raised about its validity. The applicant's application for special leave to appeal was dismissed.

The High Court directed the Registrar to draw up, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application, as per the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth). The judges Keane and Edelman agreed that the application did not warrant special leave to appeal and that the interests of justice would not be served by granting an adjournment. The decision of the Court of Appeal was upheld, and the applicant's appeal was dismissed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established