Some of the relevant Victorian Bar Rules[1], are [emphasis mine]:
“4. A barrister must not engage in conduct which is – (a) dishonest or otherwise discreditable to a barrister; (b) prejudicial to the administration of justice; or (c) likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession or in the administration of justice or otherwise bring the legal profession into disrepute”.
“18. A barrister must not make submissions or express views to a court on any material evidence or material issue in the case in terms which convey or appear to convey the barrister’s opinion on the merits of that evidence or issue”.
“19. A barrister must not knowingly make a misleading statement to a court on any matter”.
“20. A barrister must take all necessary steps to correct any misleading statement made by the barrister to a court as soon as possible after the barrister becomes aware that the statement was misleading”.
“24. A barrister must, at an appropriate time in the hearing of the case and if the court has not yet been informed of that matter, inform the court of: (a) any binding authority; (b) any authority decided by an Australian appellate Court; (c) any authority on the same or materially similar legislation as that in question in the case, including any authority decided at first instance in the Federal Court or a Supreme Court, which has not been disapproved; or (d) any applicable legislation; which the barrister has reasonable grounds to believe to be directly in point against the client’s case”.
“28. A barrister must inform the court in civil proceedings of any misapprehension by the court as to the effect of an order which the court is making, as soon as the barrister becomes aware of the misapprehension while at the same time respecting the confidences and the interests of the client as far as that is possible”.
“29 A barrister who, as a result of information provided by the client or a witness called on behalf of the client, learns during a hearing or after judgment or decision is reserved and while it remains pending, that the client or a witness called on behalf of the client: (a) has lied in a material particular to the court or has procured another person to lie to the court; or (b) has falsified or procured another person to falsify in any way a document which has been tendered; or (c) has suppressed or procured another person to suppress material evidence upon a topic where there was a positive duty to make disclosure to the court: (i) must refuse to take any further part in the case unless the client authorises the barrister to inform the court of the lie or falsification or suppression; (ii) mustpromptly inform the court of the lie or falsification or suppression upon the client authorising the barrister to do so; but (iii) must not otherwise inform the court of the lie or falsification or suppression”.
“32 When drawing or settling a pleading or affidavit, a barrister shall not include an allegation which is not supported by facts contained in instructions, or by facts which the barrister otherwise reasonably believes to exist”.
“34 A barrister must not draw or settle any court document alleging criminality, fraud or other serious misconduct unless the barrister believes on reasonable grounds that: (a) factual material already available to the barrister provides a proper basis for the allegation if it is made in a pleading; (b) the evidence in which the allegation is made, if it is made in evidence, will be admissible in the case when it is filed; and (c) the client wishes the allegation to be made, after having been advised of the seriousness of the allegation and of the possible consequences for the client if it is not made out”.
“37. In any proceedings, a barrister shall not permit himself or herself to be made the instrument by which publicity is obtained for allegations which are scandalous or calculated to vilify, insult or injure the commercial or personal reputation of another person or corporation”.
“38. A barrister must not cross-examine so as to suggest criminality, fraud or other serious misconduct on the part of any person unless: (a) the barrister believes on reasonable grounds that the material already available to the barrister provides a proper basis for the suggestion; (b) in cross-examination going to a fact in issue, the suggestion is part of the case for the client; or (c) in cross-examination going to credit alone, the barrister believes on reasonable grounds that affirmative answers to the suggestion would diminish the witness’s credibility”.
“39. A barrister may regard the opinion of the instructing solicitor that material which appears to support a suggestion within Rule 38 is itself credible as a reasonable ground for holding the belief required by Rule 38(a)”.
“41. A barrister shall not in questioning a witness use any document or thing so as to induce a belief in the mind of a witness, jury or court that there is documentary information to support the substance of the suggestion conveyed by a question when the document or thing does not support such suggestion”.
“50. A barrister must not knowingly make a false statement to the opponent concerning the facts of, evidence in support of or law applicable to the client’s case”.
“51. A barrister must take all necessary steps to correct any false statement of the kind referred to in Rule 50 unknowingly made by the barrister to the opponent as soon as possible after the barrister becomes aware that the statement was false”.
“85. If a barrister intends to rely on an unreported decision then, before doing so, it should be brought to the attention of opposing counsel, and if necessary a copy supplied in sufficient time for proper consideration of it”.
The Legal profession uniform conduct (barristers) Rules 2015 – which are subject to the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014) are [emphasis mine]:
“3. The object of these Rules is to ensure that barristers: (a) act in accordance with the general principles of professional conduct; … (c) recognise and discharge their obligations in relation to the administration of justice; and (d) provide services of the highest standard unaffected by personal interest”.
“4. These Rules are made in the belief that: (a) barristers owe their paramount duty to the administration of justice; (b) barristers must maintain high standards of professional conduct; (c) barristers as specialist advocates in the administration of justice, must act honestly, fairly, skilfully, bravely and with competence and diligence; (d) barristers owe duties to the courts, to their clients and to their barrister and solicitor colleagues; (e) barristers should exercise their forensic judgments and give their advice independently and for the proper administration of justice, notwithstanding any contrary desires of their clients …”
“7. These Rules are not intended to be a complete or detailed code of conduct for barristers. Other standards for, requirements of and sanctions on the conduct of barristers are found in the inherent disciplinary jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, the legislation regulating the legal profession and in the general law (including the law relating to contempt of court)”.
“8. A barrister must not engage in conduct which is: (a) dishonest or otherwise discreditable to a barrister; (b) prejudicial to the administration of justice; or (c) likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession or the administration of justice or otherwise bring the legal profession into disrepute”.
“23. A barrister has an overriding duty to the court to act with independence in the interests of the administration of justice”.
“24. A barrister must not deceive or knowingly or recklessly mislead the court”.
“25. A barrister must take all necessary steps to correct any misleading statement made by the barrister to a court as soon as possible after the barrister becomes aware that the statement was misleading”.
“26. A barrister must alert the opponent and if necessary inform the court if any express concession made in the course of a trial in civil proceedings by the opponent about evidence, case-law or legislation is to the knowledge of the barrister contrary to the true position and is believed by the barrister to have been made by mistake”.
“29. A barrister must, at the appropriate time in the hearing of the case if the court has not yet been informed of that matter, inform the court of: (a) any binding authority; (b) where there is no binding authority any authority decided by an Australian appellate court; and (c) any applicable legislation; known to the barrister and which the barrister has reasonable grounds to believe to be directly in point, against the client’s case”.
“31. A barrister who becomes aware of a matter within rule 29 after judgment or decision has been reserved and while it remains pending, whether the authority or legislation came into existence before or after argument, mustinform the court of that matter by: (a) a letter to the court, copied to the opponent, and limited to the relevant reference unless the opponent has consented beforehand to further material in the letter; or (b) requesting the court to relist the case for further argument on a convenient date, after first notifying the opponent of the intended request and consulting the opponent as to the convenient date for further argument”.
“34. A barrister must inform the court of any apparent misapprehension by the court as to the effect of an order which the court is making, as soon as the barrister becomes aware of the misapprehension”.
“44. A barrister must not make submissions or express views to a court on any material evidence or issue in the case in terms which convey or appear to convey the barrister’s personal opinion on the merits of that evidence or issue”.
“49. A barrister must not knowingly make a false or misleading statement to an opponent in relation to the case (including its compromise)”.
“50. A barrister must take all necessary steps to correct any false or misleading statement in relation to the case made by the barrister to an opponent as soon as possible after the barrister becomes aware that the statement was false or misleading”.
“57. A barrister: (a) must seek to ensure that the barrister does work which the barrister is briefed to do in sufficient time to enable compliance with orders, directions, rules or practice notes of the court; and (b) if the barrister has reasonable grounds to believe that the barrister may not complete any such work on time, must promptly inform the instructing solicitor or the client”.
“58. A barrister must seek to ensure that work which the barrister is briefed to do in relation to a case is done so as to: (a) confine the case to identified issues which are genuinely in dispute; (b) have the case ready to be heard as soon as practicable; (c) present the identified issues in dispute clearly and succinctly; (d) limit evidence, including cross-examination, to that which is reasonably necessary to advance and protect the client’s interests which are at stake in the case; and (e) occupy as short a time in court as is reasonably necessary to advance and protect the client’s interests which are at stake in the case”.
“60. A barrister must take care to ensure that the barrister’s advice to invoke the coercive powers of a court: (a) is reasonably justified by the material then available to the barrister; (b) is appropriate for the robust advancement of the client’s case on its merits; (c) is not given principally in order to harass or embarrass a person; and (d) is not given principally in order to gain some collateral advantage for the client or the barrister or the instructing solicitor or a third party out of court”. “61. A barrister must take care to ensure that decisions by the barrister to make allegations or suggestions under privilege against any person: (a) are reasonably justified by the material then available to the barrister; (b) are appropriate for the robust advancement of the client’s case on its merits; and (c) are not made principally in order to harass or embarrass a person”.
“61. A barrister must take care to ensure that decisions by the barrister to make allegations or suggestions under privilege against any person: (a) are reasonably justified by the material then available to the barrister; (b) are appropriate for the robust advancement of the client’s case on its merits; and (c) are not made principally in order to harass or embarrass a person”.
“64. A barrister must not allege any matter of fact in: (a) any court document settled by the barrister; (b) any submission during any hearing; (c) the course of an opening address; or (d) the course of a closing address or submission on the evidence; unless the barrister believes on reasonable grounds that the factual material already available provides a proper basis to do so”.
“65. A barrister must not allege any matter of fact amounting to criminality, fraud or other serious misconductagainst any person unless the barrister believes on reasonable grounds that: (a) available material by which the allegation could be supported provides a proper basis for it; and (b) the client wishes the allegation to be made, after having been advised of the seriousness of the allegation and of the possible consequences for the client and the case if it is not made out”.
“67. A barrister must not make a suggestion in cross-examination on credit unless the barrister believes on reasonable grounds that acceptance of the suggestion would diminish the credibility of the evidence of the witness”.
“69. A barrister must not: (a) advise or suggest to a witness that false or misleading evidence should be given nor condone another person doing so; or (b) coach a witness by advising what answers the witness should give to questions which might be asked”.
“70. A barrister does not breach rule 69 by expressing a general admonition to tell the truth, or by questioning and testing in conference the version of evidence to be given by a prospective witness, including drawing the witness’s attention to inconsistencies or other difficulties with the evidence, but must not encourage the witness to give evidence different from the evidence which the witness believes to be true”.
“71. A barrister must not confer with, or condone another legal practitioner conferring with, more than one lay witness including a party or client at the same time: (a) about any issue which there are reasonable grounds for the barrister to believe may be contentious at a hearing; and (b) where such conferral could affect evidence to be given by any of those witnesses; unless the barrister believes on reasonable grounds that special circumstances require such a conference”.
“72. A barrister does not breach rule 71 by conferring with, or condoning another legal practitioner conferring with, more than one client about undertakings to a court, admissions or concessions of fact, amendments of pleadings or compromise”.
“73. A barrister must not confer with any witness including a party or client called by the barrister on any matter related to the proceedings while that witness remains under cross-examination, unless: (a) the cross-examiner has consented beforehand to the barrister doing so; or (b) the barrister: (i) believes on reasonable grounds that special circumstances (including the need for instructions on a proposed compromise) require such a conference; (ii) has, if possible, informed the cross-examiner beforehand of the barrister’s intention to do so; and (iii) otherwise does inform the cross-examiner as soon as possible of the barrister having done so”.
“125. Unless the context requires otherwise, the following expressions are defined as follows when used in these Rules (inter alia): ‘legislation’ includes delegated legislation; ‘opponent’ means the legal practitioner appearing for the party opposed to the client, or the party opposed to the client if that party is unrepresented, and any other legal practitioner appearing for another party in the matter or any other party if that party is unrepresented; ‘order’ includes a judgement, decision or determination; ‘potential proceeding’ means proceedings which have not been commenced but where there is information which has been publicised that such process is imminent or where there is a very real likelihood that process will be instigated; ‘proceedings’ includes any inquiry, investigation or hearing by or before an investigative tribunal; ‘process of court’ means any originating process, pleading, affidavit or notice filed in court and any document issued by the court but does not include submissions or lists of authorities”.
The Legal Profession Act 2004 (“LPA”) applies to each of the solicitors and barristers up until the repealing of it in 2014[2]. The LPA states, inter alia [emphasis mine]:
“2.4.6 Local legal practitioner is officer of Supreme Court – A person who is not already an officer of the Supreme Court becomes an officer of the Supreme Court on being granted a local practising certificate”.
“2.7.17 Application of legal profession rules – Legal profession rules, so far as they apply to Australian legal practitioners, also apply to Australian legal practitioners who are officers or employees of an incorporated legal practice, unless the rules otherwise provide”.
“3.2.1 Purposes – The purposes of this Part are— (a) to make provision for certain matters generally in relation to engaging in legal practice in this jurisdiction; (b) to promote the maintenance of high standards of professional conduct by Australian legal practitioners and locally registered foreign lawyers by providing for the making and enforcement of rules of professional conduct that apply to them when they practise in this jurisdiction; …”
“3.2.9 Rules for Australian legal practitioners: (1) The Board may make rules about legal practice in this jurisdiction engaged in by Australian legal practitioners. (2) The Victorian Bar, with the approval of the Board, may make rules about legal practice in this jurisdiction engaged in by barristers. (3) The Law Institute, with the approval of the Board, may make rules about legal practice in this jurisdiction engaged in by Australian legal practitioners other than barristers. (4) Legal profession rules made by the Board prevail to the extent of any inconsistency with legal profession rules made by the Victorian Bar or the Law Institute”.
“3.2.14 Rules: (1) The Board may make legal profession rules for or with respect to the following matters— (a) the provision of legal services by or in connection with incorporated legal practices or multi-disciplinary partnerships, and in particular the provision of legal services by— (i) officers or employees of incorporated legal practices; or (ii) partners or employees of multi-disciplinary partnerships; (b) the provision of services that are not legal services by or in connection with incorporated legal practices or multi-disciplinary partnerships, but only if the provision of those services by— (i) officers or employees of incorporated legal practices; or (ii) partners or employees of multi-disciplinary partnerships—may give rise to a conflict of interest relating to the provision of legal services. (2) Without limiting subsection (1), legal profession rules may be made for or with respect to professional obligations relating to legal services provided by or in connection with incorporated legal practices or multi-disciplinary partnerships”.
“3.6.2 Definitions – In this Part— dishonesty includes fraud”.
“4.1.1 Purposes – The purposes of this Chapter are— (a) to provide a scheme for the discipline of the legal profession in this jurisdiction, in the interests of the administration of justice and for the protection of consumers of legal services and the public generally; (b) to promote and enforce the professional standards, competence and honesty of the legal profession; (c) to provide a means of redress for complaints about the legal profession”.
“4.1.2 Application of Chapter to practitioners and law practices: (1) This Chapter applies to an Australian legal practitioner in respect of conduct to which this Chapter applies, and so applies— (a) whether or not the practitioner is a local lawyer; and (b) whether or not the practitioner holds a local practising certificate; and (c) whether or not the practitioner holds an interstate practising certificate; and (d) whether or not the practitioner resides or has an office in this jurisdiction; and (e) whether or not the person making the complaint about the conduct resides, works or has an office in this jurisdiction. (2) This Chapter applies to a law practice in respect of conduct to which this Chapter applies, to the extent that the conduct gives rise to a civil dispute”.
“4.1.5 Conduct to which this Chapter applies—…, serious offences … (1) This Chapter applies to the following conduct of a local legal practitioner whether occurring in Australia or elsewhere— (a) conduct of the practitioner in respect of which a court makes a finding of guilt for— (i) a serious offence; or … (iii) an offence involving dishonesty; … (2) This section has effect despite anything in section 4.1.4”.
“4.4.2 Unsatisfactory professional conduct – For the purposes of this Act—unsatisfactory professional conductincludes conduct of an Australian legal practitioner occurring in connection with the practice of law that falls short of the standard of competence and diligence that a member of the public is entitled to expect of a reasonably competent Australian legal practitioner. Note: Section 4.4.4 specifies conduct that is capable of constituting unsatisfactory professional conduct and section 4.4.5 specifies conduct that constitutes unsatisfactory professional conduct”.
“4.4.3 Professional misconduct: (1) For the purposes of this Act—professional misconduct includes— (a) unsatisfactory professional conduct of an Australian legal practitioner, where the conduct involves a substantial or consistent failure to reach or maintain a reasonable standard of competence and diligence; and (b) conduct of an Australian legal practitioner, whether occurring in connection with the practice of law or occurring otherwise than in connection with the practice of law, that would, if established, justify a finding that the practitioner is not a fit and proper person to engage in legal practice. Note: Section 4.4.4 specifies conduct that is capable of constituting professional misconduct and section 4.4.6 specifies conduct that constitutes professional misconduct. (2) For the purpose of finding that an Australian legal practitioner is not a fit and proper person to engage in legal practice as mentioned in subsection (1), regard may be had to the suitability matters that would be considered if the practitioner were an applicant for admission to the legal profession under this Act or for the grant or renewal of a local practising certificate”.
“4.4.4 Conduct capable of constituting unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct – Without limiting section 4.4.2 or 4.4.3, the following conduct is capable of constituting unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct—(a) conduct consisting of a contravention of this Act, the regulations or the legal profession rules; (b) charging of excessive legal costs in connection with the practice of law; (c) conduct in respect of which there is a finding of guilt for—(i) a serious offence; or … (iii) an offence involving dishonesty”.
“4.4.6 Conduct that constitutes professional misconduct – Without limiting section 4.4.3 or 4.4.4, the following conduct by an Australian legal practitioner constitutes professional misconduct—(a) wilful or reckless failure to comply with a condition to which an Australian practising certificate held by the practitioner is subject; (b) wilful or reckless failure to comply with an undertaking given to a court, …”
The Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (“LPULA”):
“Schedule 1 –”
“3 Objectives – The objectives of this Law are to promote the administration of justice and an efficient and effective Australian legal profession, by— … (b) ensuring lawyers are competent and maintain high ethical and professional standards in the provision of legal services; and (c) enhancing the protection of clients of law practices and the protection of the public generally”.
“6(1) Definitions: affairs of a law practice includes the following— … (c) any transaction— … (ii) in which the law practice or an associate or former associate of the law practice has acted for a party. associate of a law practice means a person who is one or more of the following—(a) a principal of the law practice; (b) a partner, director, officer, employee or agent of the law practice; (c) an Australian legal practitioner who is a consultant to the law practice; Australian Bar Association means the association named The Australian Bar Association; Australian lawyer means a person admitted to the Australian legal profession in this jurisdiction or any other jurisdiction; Australian legal practitioner means an Australian lawyer who holds a current Australian practising certificate; barrister means an Australian legal practitioner whose Australian practising certificate is subject to a condition that the holder is authorised to engage in legal practice as or in the manner of a barrister only;obstruct includes hinder, delay, resist and attempt to obstruct; professional obligations includes— (a) duties to the Supreme Courts; and (b) obligations in connection with conflicts of interest; and (c) duties to clients, including disclosure; and (d) ethical standards required to be observed—that do not otherwise arise under this Law or the Uniform Rules; serious offence means an offence that is—(a) an indictable offence against a law of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory (whether or not the offence is or may be dealt with summarily)”.
“15 Objective – The objective of this Part is to protect the administration of justice and the clients of law practices by providing a system under which persons are eligible for admission to the Australian legal profession only if—… (b)they are fit and proper persons to be admitted”.
“33 Obligations not affected by nature of business structures: (1) An Australian legal practitioner must comply with this Law, the Uniform Rules and his or her other professional obligations, regardless of the business structure in which or in connection with which the practitioner provides legal services. (2) A law practice must comply with this Law, the Uniform Rules and its other professional obligations, regardless of the business structure in which or in connection with which the law practice provides legal services”.
“34 Responsibilities of principals: (1) Each principal of a law practice is responsible for ensuring that reasonable steps are taken to ensure that— (a) all legal practitioner associates of the law practice comply with their obligations under this Law and the Uniform Rules and their other professional obligations; and (b) the legal services provided by the law practice are provided in accordance with this Law, the Uniform Rules and other professional obligations. (2) A failure to uphold that responsibility is capable of constituting unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct”.
“35 Liability of principals (1) If a law practice contravenes, whether by act or omission, any provision of this Law or the Uniform Rules imposing an obligation on the law practice, a principal of the law practice is taken to have contravened the same provision, if— (a) the principal knowingly authorised or permitted the contravention; or (b) the principal was in, or ought reasonably to have been in, a position to influence the conduct of the law practice in relation to its contravention of the provision and failed to take reasonable steps to prevent the contravention by the law practice. (2) A contravention by a principal arising under subsection (1) is capable of constituting unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct by the principal. (3) Neither subsection (1) nor (2) affects any liability of the law practice or any other person for the contravention”.
“39 Undue influence – A person must not cause or induce or attempt to cause or induce a law practice or a legal practitioner associate of a law practice to contravene this Law, the Uniform Rules or other professional obligations. Penalty: 100 penalty units”.
“260 Objectives – The objectives of this Chapter are— … (b) to provide a scheme for the discipline of the Australian legal profession, in the interests of the administration of justice and for the protection of clients of law practices and the public generally; and (c) to monitor, promote and enforce the professional standards, competence and honesty of the Australian legal profession”.
“265 What is a complaint? A complaint may relate to any dispute or issue about any conduct to which this Chapter applies”.
“266 Who may make a complaint? (1) Any person or body may make a complaint. (2) The designated local regulatory authority may initiate a complaint containing a disciplinary matter only”.
“268 Matters in a complaint: (1) A complaint may contain either or both of the following— (a) a consumer matter; (b) a disciplinary matter. (2) A dispute or issue about conduct that is the subject of a complaint can be both a consumer matter and a disciplinary matter. Note For example, a dispute or issue relating to costs could be both a consumer matter (i.e. a costs dispute) and a disciplinary matter”.
“270 Disciplinary matters – A disciplinary matter is so much of a complaint about a lawyer or a law practice as would, if the conduct concerned were established, amount to unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct”.
“272 Time limits on making complaints: (1) … a complaint must be about conduct alleged to have occurred within the period of 3 years immediately before the complaint is made, but the designated local regulatory authority may waive the time requirement if satisfied that— (a) it is just and fair to deal with the complaint having regard to the delay and the reasons for the delay; or (b) the complaint involves an allegation of professional misconduct and it is in the public interest to deal with the complaint”.
“275 Other rights not affected – This Division does not affect any other right of a person to complain about the conduct of a lawyer or a law practice under any other legislation or to seek a remedy at common law or in equity in relation to the conduct”.
“296 Unsatisfactory professional conduct – For the purposes of this Law, unsatisfactory professional conductincludes conduct of a lawyer occurring in connection with the practice”.
“297 Professional misconduct : (1) For the purposes of this Law, professional misconduct includes— (a) unsatisfactory professional conduct of a lawyer, where the conduct involves a substantial or consistent failure to reach or maintain a reasonable standard of competence and diligence; and (b) conduct of a lawyer whether occurring in connection with the practice of law or occurring otherwise than in connection with the practice of law that would, if established, justify a finding that the lawyer is not a fit and proper person to engage in legal practice. (2) For the purpose of deciding whether a lawyer is or is not a fit and proper person to engage in legal practice as referred to in subsection (1)(b), regard may be had to the matters that would be considered if the lawyer were an applicant for admission to the Australian legal profession or for the grant or renewal of an Australian practising certificate and any other relevant matters”.
“298 Conduct capable of constituting unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct – Without limitation, the following conduct is capable of constituting unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct— (a) conduct consisting of a contravention of this Law, whether or not— (i) the contravention is an offence or punishable by way of a pecuniary penalty order; or (ii) the person has been convicted of an offence in relation to the contravention; or (iii) a pecuniary penalty order has been made against the person under Part 9.7 in relation to the contravention; (b) conduct consisting of a contravention of the Uniform Rules; (c) conduct involving contravention of the Legal Profession Uniform Law Act of this jurisdiction (other than this Law), whether or not the person has been convicted of an offence in relation to the contravention; (d) charging more than a fair and reasonable amount for legal costs in connection with the practice of law; (e) conduct in respect of which there is a conviction for— (i) a serious offence; or … (iii) an offence involving dishonesty…”
“306 Making of compensation orders: (1) For the purposes of section 290, the designated local regulatory authority may make a compensation order against a respondent lawyer or law practice in accordance with this Part. (2) For the purposes of section 302, the designated tribunal may make a compensation order against a respondent lawyer in accordance with this Part”.
“307 Request by complainant for compensation order: (1) A complainant may request— (a) the designated local regulatory authority; or (b) the designated tribunal in proceedings under Division 3 of Part 5.4— to make a compensation order. (2) A compensation order may be requested in respect of loss suffered by—(a) the complainant; or (b) another person who is a client of the respondent— (or both) because of the conduct the subject of the complaint. The complainant, or other person, suffering the loss is referred to in this Part as anaggrieved person. (3) A complainant who makes such a request must describe the loss suffered by the aggrieved person and the relevant circumstances. (4) A request may be made in the complaint or to the designated local regulatory authority at any time after the complaint is made and before it is disposed of. (5) However, a request may not be made after proceedings have been initiated in the designated tribunal with respect to the complaint unless the designated tribunal grants the complainant leave to make the request”.
“308 Nature of compensation orders – A compensation order is an order to compensate the aggrieved person for loss suffered because of conduct that is the subject of a complaint and consists of one or more of the orders referred to in subsections (2), (3) and (4). A compensation order may include an order that the respondent lawyer or law practice pay to the aggrieved person, by way of monetary compensation for the loss, a specified amount not exceeding—(a) where the compensation order is made by the designated local regulatory authority— $25 000; or (b) where the compensation order is made by the designated tribunal—$25 000 or a greater amount agreed to with the consent of both the complainant and the respondent lawyer or law practice. (3) A compensation order may include an order that the respondent lawyer or law practice cannot recover or must repay the whole or a specified part of the amount charged to the aggrieved person by the lawyer or law practice in respect of specified legal services. An order under this subsection is effective— (a) to prevent recovery of an amount even if proceedings to recover the amount (or any part of it) have been commenced by or on behalf of the lawyer or law practice; and (b) to require repayment of an amount even if a court has ordered payment of the amount (or an amount of which it is part) in proceedings brought by or on behalf of the lawyer or law practice. (4) A compensation order may include an order discharging a lien possessed by the lawyer or law practice in respect of a specified document or class of documents. (5) A compensation order may specify the person to whom monetary compensation is payable, whether to the aggrieved person or to another person on behalf of the aggrieved person. Note: Section 311 provides that compensation awarded under this Part does not affect any other remedy available for the loss”.
“311 Other remedies not affected – The recovery of compensation awarded under this Part does not affect any other remedy available to an aggrieved person, but any compensation so awarded must be taken into account, and appropriate adjustments made, in any other proceedings by or on behalf of the aggrieved person in respect of the same loss”.
“315 Duty to deal with complaints – It is the duty of the designated local regulatory authority to deal with all complaints properly made and to deal with them in accordance with this Law and the Uniform Rules”.
“316 Duty to exercise discretions fairly – It is the duty of the designated local regulatory authority, in exercising or considering whether or how to exercise any applicable discretions when dealing with a complaint (including the conduct of any investigation), to act in a fair manner, having regard to the respective interests of the complainant and the respondent and to the public interest”.
“317 Duty to deal with complaints efficiently and expeditiously – It is the duty of the designated local regulatory authority to deal with complaints (including the conduct of any investigations) as efficiently and expeditiously as is practicable”.
“318 Notice of decisions and determinations: (1) It is the duty of the designated local regulatory authority in relation to a complaint to give the complainant and the respondent written notice of— (a) a decision to close the complaint; or (b) a determination made in relation to the complaint (including a costs dispute); or (c) a decision made as a result of an internal review in connection with the complaint. (2) A notice under this section must be given as soon as practicable after the decision or determination is made, and must include a statement of reasons for the decision. (3) The designated local regulatory authority need not give a party to a complaint notice of a decision or determination to close the complaint if the designated local regulatory authority considers that it would be appropriate in the circumstances to dispense with notifying that party”.
The ASC Rules[3]. As well as solicitors, each of the barristers were also bound by as particularly noted in the Legal Profession Act 2004, at chapters 3.2.9 and 3.2.14. Some of these Rules particularly state [emphasis mine]:
“1. Application and interpretation: 1.1 These Rules apply to all solicitors within Australia ….”
“2 Purpose and effect of the rules: 2.1 The purpose of these Rules is to assist solicitors to act ethically and in accordance with the principles of professional conduct established by the common law and these Rules. 2.2 In considering whether a solicitor has engaged in unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct, the Rules apply in addition to the common law. 2.3 A breach of these Rules is capable of constituting unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct….”
“3 Paramount duty to the court and the administration of justice: 3.1 A solicitor’s duty to the court and the administration of justice is paramount and prevails to the extent of inconsistency with any other duty”.
“4 Other fundamental ethical duties: 4.1 A solicitor must also: … 4.1.2 be honest and courteous in all dealings in the course of legal practice; … 4.1.4 avoid any compromise to their integrity and professional independence; and 4.1.5 comply with these Rules and the law”.
“5 Dishonest and disreputable conduct: 5.1 A solicitor must not engage in conduct, in the course of practice or otherwise, which demonstrates that the solicitor is not a fit and proper person to practise law, or which is likely to a material degree to: 5.1.1 be prejudicial to, or diminish the public confidence in, the administration of justice; or 5.1.2 bring the profession into disrepute”.
“6 Undertakings: 6.1 A solicitor who has given an undertaking in the course of legal practice must honour that undertaking and ensure the timely and effective performance of the undertaking, unless released by the recipient or by a court of competent jurisdiction. …”
“17 Independence — avoidance of personal bias: 17.1 A solicitor representing a client in a matter that is before the court must not act as the mere mouthpiece of the client or of the instructing solicitor (if any) and mustexercise the forensic judgments called for during the case independently, after the appropriate consideration of the client’s and the instructing solicitor’s instructions where applicable”.
“19 Frankness in court: 19.1 A solicitor must not deceive or knowingly or recklessly mislead the court. 19.2 A solicitor must take all necessary steps to correct any misleading statement made by the solicitor to a court as soon as possible after the solicitor becomes aware that the statement was misleading. … 19.6 A solicitor must, at the appropriate time in the hearing of the case if the court has not yet been informed of that matter, inform the court of: 19.6.1 any binding authority; 19.6.2 where there is no binding authority, any authority decided by an Australian appellate court; and 19.6.3 any applicable legislation, known to the solicitor and which the solicitor has reasonable grounds to believe to be directly in point, against the client’s case. … 19.11 A solicitor mustinform the court of any misapprehension by the court as to the effect of an order which the court is making, as soon as the solicitor becomes aware of the misapprehension. 19.12 A solicitor must alert the opponent and if necessary inform the court if any express concession made in the course of a trial in civil proceedings by the opponent about evidence, case-law or legislation is to the knowledge of the solicitor contrary to the true position and is believed by the solicitor to have been made by mistake”.
“20 Delinquent or guilty clients: 20.1 A solicitor who, as a result of information provided by the client or a witness called on behalf of the client, learns during a hearing or after judgment or the decision is reserved and while it remains pending, that the client or a witness called on behalf of the client: 20.1.1 has lied in a material particular to the court or has procured another person to lie to the court; 20.1.2 has falsified or procured another person to falsify in any way a document which has been tendered; or 20.1.3 has suppressed or procured another person to suppress material evidence upon a topic where there was a positive duty to make disclosure to the court; must — 20.1.4 advise the client that the court should be informed of the lie, falsification or suppression and request authority so to inform the court; and 20.1.5 refuse to take any further part in the case unless the client authorises the solicitor to inform the court of the lie, falsification or suppression and must promptly inform the court of the lie, falsification or suppression upon the client authorising the solicitor to do so but otherwise may not inform the court of the lie, falsification or suppression. … 20.3 A solicitor whose client informs the solicitor that the client intends to disobey a court’s order must: advise the client against that course and warn the client of its dangers; not advise the client how to carry out or conceal that course…”
“21 Responsible use of court process and privilege: 21.1 A solicitor must take care to ensure that the solicitor’s advice to invoke the coercive powers of a court: 21.1.1 is reasonably justified by the material then available to the solicitor; 21.1.2 is appropriate for the robust advancement of the client’s case on its merits; 21.1.3 is notmade principally in order to harass or embarrass a person; and 21.1.4 is not made principally in order to gain some collateral advantage for the client or the solicitor or the instructing solicitor out of court. 21.2 A solicitor must take care to ensure that decisions by the solicitor to make allegations or suggestions under privilege against any person: 21.2.1 are reasonably justified by the material then available to the solicitor; 21.2.2 are appropriate for the robust advancement of the client’s case on its merits; and 21.2.3 are not made principally in order to harass or embarrass a person. 21.3 A solicitor must not allege any matter of fact in: 21.3.1 any court document settled by the solicitor; 21.3.2 any submission during any hearing; 21.3.3 the course of an opening address; or 21.3.4 the course of a closing address or submission on the evidence, unless the solicitor believes on reasonable grounds that the factual material already available provides a proper basis to do so”.
“22 Communication with opponents: 22.1 A solicitor must not knowingly make a false statement to an opponent in relation to the case (including its compromise). 22.2 A solicitor must take all necessary steps to correct any false statement made by the solicitor to an opponent as soon as possible after the solicitor becomes aware that the statement was false. …”
“30 Another solicitor or other person’s error: 30.1 A solicitor must not take unfair advantage of the obvious error of another solicitor or other person, if to do so would obtain for a client a benefit which has no supportable foundation in law or fact”.
“34 Dealing with other persons: 34.1 A solicitor must not in any action or communication associated with representing a client: 34.1.1 make any statement which grossly exceeds the legitimate assertion of the rights or entitlements of the solicitor’s client, and which misleads or intimidates the other person; … 34.1.3 use tactics that go beyond legitimate advocacy and which are primarily designed to embarrass or frustrate another person. …”
The Evidence Act 2008 states [emphasis in the Act]:
“41 Improper questions … (3) In this section, improper question or improper questioning means a question or a sequence of questions put to a witness that— (a) is misleading or confusing; or (b) is unduly annoying, harassing, intimidating, offensive, oppressive, humiliating or repetitive; or (c) is put to the witness in a manner or tone that is belittling, insulting or otherwise inappropriate”.
Evidence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1958 [emphasis mine]
“141Persons making wilful false statements on oath, declaration etc. guilty of perjury – Any person who upon or in any oath examination affidavit affirmation or declaration whatsoever which is mentioned or referred to or which is required authorized or permitted in or by or under any provision of this Act wilfully and corruptly makes any false statement whether oral or in writing shall be deemed to be guilty of wilful and corrupt perjury. This section shall apply notwithstanding that such oath examination affidavit affirmation or declaration may be required authorized or permitted by or under any other Act whether passed before or after the commencement of this Act”.
“142 Forgery, using etc. false documents an indictable offence – Any person who— …(e) except for some lawful purpose drafts engrosses copies or prepares any such document knowing the same to be untrue; (f) without full disclosure tenders in evidence or otherwise uses any such document knowing that the seal or stamp or the impression of the seal or stamp or the signature thereon or thereto has been forged or counterfeited or is false or that such document is untrue or has become wholly or partially invalid or that such document or the seal stamp or the impression of the seal or stamp or the signature thereon or thereto has been fraudulently altered— shall be guilty of an indictable offence and be liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years”.
The Crimes Act 1958 states [emphasis in the Act]:
“81 Obtaining property by deception: (1) A person who by any deception dishonestly obtains property belonging to another, with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum). (2) For purposes of this section a person is to be treated as obtaining property if he obtains ownership, possession or control of it, and obtain includes obtaining for another or enabling another to obtain or to retain. (3) Subsections (12) and (13) of section 73 shall apply for purposes of this section, with the necessary adaptation of the reference to appropriating, as it applies for purposes of section 72. (4) For the purposes of this section, deception— (a) means any deception (whether deliberate or reckless) by words or conduct as to fact or as to law, including a deception as to the present intentions of the person using the deception or any other person; and (b) includes an act or thing done or omitted to be done with the intention of causing— (i) a computer system; or (ii) a machine that is designed to operate by means of payment or identification—to make a response that the person doing or omitting to do the act or thing is not authorised to cause the computer system or machine to make”.
“82 Obtaining financial advantage by deception: (1) A person who by any deception dishonestly obtains for himself or another any financial advantage is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum). (2) For purposes of this section deception has the same meaning as in section 81”.
“87 Blackmail (1) A person is guilty of blackmail if, with a view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces; and for this purpose a demand with menaces is unwarranted unless the person making it does so in the belief— (a) that he has reasonable grounds for making the demand; and (b) that the use of the menaces is proper means of reinforcing the demand. (2) The nature of the act or omission demanded is immaterial, and it is also immaterial whether the menaces relate to action to be taken by the person making the demand. (3) A person guilty of blackmail is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to level 4 imprisonment (15 years maximum)”.
“314 Perjury: (1) Whosoever commits wilful and corrupt perjury or subornation of perjury shall be liable to level 4 imprisonment (15 years maximum). (2) Where in any Act it is provided that any person shall be liable to the penalties of perjury or shall be guilty of perjury or shall be deemed to have committed perjury or any similar expression is used such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence against subsection (1) and may be proceeded against tried and punished accordingly. (3) Where by or under any Act it is required or authorized that facts matters or things be verified or otherwise assured or ascertained by or upon the oath affirmation declaration or affidavit of some or any person, any person who in any such case takes or makes any oath affirmation or declaration so required or authorized and who knowingly wilfully and corruptly upon such oath affirmation or declaration deposes swears to or makes any false statement as to any such fact matter or thing, and any person who knowingly wilfully and corruptly upon oath deposes to the truth of any statement for so verifying assuring or ascertaining any such fact matter or thing or purporting so to do, or who knowingly wilfully and corruptly takes makes signs or subscribes any such affirmation declaration or affidavit as to any such fact matter or thing, such statement affirmation declaration or affidavit being untrue wholly or in part, or who knowingly wilfully and corruptly omits from any such affirmation declaration or affidavit made or sworn under the provisions of any law any matter which by the provisions of such law is required to be stated in such affirmation declaration or affidavit, shall be deemed guilty of wilful and corrupt perjury. Nothing herein contained shall affect any case amounting to perjury at the common law or the case of any offence in respect of which other provision is made by any Act”
”315 All evidence material with respect to perjury – All evidence and proof whatsoever, whether given or made orally or by or in any affidavit examination declaration or deposition, shall be deemed and taken to be material with respect to the liability of any person to be proceeded against and punished for perjury or subornation of perjury”
“321 Conspiracy to commit an offence: (1) Subject to this Act, if a person agrees with any other person or persons that a course of conduct shall be pursued which will involve the commission of an offence by one or more of the parties to the agreement, he is guilty of the indictable offence of conspiracy to commit that offence. (2) For a person to be guilty under subsection (1) of conspiracy to commit a particular offence both he and at least one other party to the agreement—(a) must intend that the offence the subject of the agreement be committed; and (b) must intend or believe that any fact or circumstance the existence of which is an element of the offence will exist at the time when the conduct constituting the offence is to take place. (3) A person may be guilty under subsection (1) of conspiracy to commit an offence notwithstanding the existence of facts of which he is unaware which make commission of the offence by the agreed course of conduct impossible”.
“321G Incitement: (1) Subject to this Act, where a person in Victoria or elsewhere incites any other person to pursue a course of conduct which will involve the commission of an offence by— (a) the person incited; (b) the inciter; or (c) both the inciter and the person incited—if the inciting is acted on in accordance with the inciter’s intention, the inciter is guilty of the indictable offence of incitement. (2) For a person to be guilty under subsection (1) of incitement the person— (a) must intend that the offence the subject of the incitement be committed; and (b) must intend or believe that any fact or circumstance the existence of which is an element of the offence in question will exist at the time when the conduct constituting the offence is to take place. (3) A person may be guilty under subsection (1) of incitement notwithstanding the existence of facts of which the person is unaware which make commission of the offence in question by the course of conduct incited impossible”.
“321M Attempt – person who attempts to commit an indictable offence is guilty of the indictable offence of attempting to commit that offence”.
“321N Conduct constituting attempt: …. (2) For a person to be guilty of attempting to commit an offence, the person must— (a) intend that the offence the subject of the attempt be committed; and (b) intend or believe that any fact or circumstance the existence of which is an element of the offence will exist at the time the offence is to take place. (3) A person may be guilty of attempting to commit an offence despite the existence of facts of which he or she is unaware which make the commission of the offence attempted impossible”.
The Criminal Procedure Act 2009:
“415 Court may direct that a person be prosecuted for perjury: (1) A court may direct that a person be tried for perjury if it appears to the court that the person has committed perjury in— (a) any evidence given orally before the court; or (b) an affidavit, deposition, examination or other proceeding made or taken before the court”.
The Civil Procedure Act 2010 (“CPA”) states [emphasis mine]:
“10 Application of overarching obligations— participants: (1) The overarching obligations apply to— (a) any person who is a party; (b) any legal practitioner or other representative acting for or on behalf of a party; (c) any law practice acting for or on behalf of a party; …”
“11 Application of overarching obligations—civil proceedings – The overarching obligations apply in respect of the conduct of any aspect of a civil proceeding in a court, including, but not limited to—(a) any interlocutory application or interlocutory proceeding; (b) any appeal from an order or a judgment in a civil proceeding; (c) any appropriate dispute resolution undertaken in relation to a civil proceeding”.
“12 Overarching obligations prevail over certain other obligations and duties – Subject to the paramount duty, the overarching obligations prevail over any legal obligation, contractual obligation or other obligation which a person to whom the overarching obligations apply may have, to the extent that the obligations are inconsistent”.
“13 Overarching obligations and legal practitioners: (1) The overarching obligations do not override any duty or obligation of a legal practitioner to a client, whether arising under the common law or by or under any statute or otherwise, to the extent that those duties and obligations and the overarching obligations can operate consistently. (2) Despite subsection (1), a legal practitioner or a law practice engaged by, or on behalf of, a client in connection with a civil proceeding must comply with the overarching obligations despite any obligation the legal practitioner or the law practice has to act in accordance with the instructions or wishes of the client. (3) In the case of any inconsistency between any overarching obligation and a duty or obligation referred to in subsection (1) or an instruction or a wish referred to in subsection (2)—(a) the overarching obligation prevailsto the extent of that inconsistency; and (b) in the case of the instruction or wish of a client, the legal practitioner is not required to comply with any instruction or wish of the client which is inconsistent with the overarching obligation”.
“14 Legal practitioner or law practice not to cause client to contravene overarching obligations – A legal practitioner or a law practice engaged by, or on behalf of, a client in connection with a civil proceeding must not by his, her or its conduct cause the client to contravene any overarching obligation”.
“15 Legal practitioner’s duty to court not overridden – Nothing in this Part overrides any duty or obligation of a legal practitioner to the court, whether arising under the common law or by or under any statute or otherwise”.
“16 Paramount duty – Each person to whom the overarching obligations apply has a paramount duty to the court to further the administration of justice in relation to any civil proceeding in which that person is involved, including, but not limited to— (a) any interlocutory application or interlocutory proceeding; (b) any appeal from an order or a judgment in a civil proceeding; (c) any appropriate dispute resolution undertaken in relation to a civil proceeding”.
“17 Overarching obligation to act honestly – A person to whom the overarching obligations apply must acthonestly at all times in relation to a civil proceeding”.
“18 Overarching obligation—requirement of proper basis – A person to whom the overarching obligations apply must not make any claim or make a response to any claim in a civil proceeding that—(a) is frivolous; or (b) is vexatious; or (c) is an abuse of process; or (d) does not, on the factual and legal material available to the person at the time of making the claim or responding to the claim, as the case requires, have a proper basis”.
“19 Overarching obligation to only take steps to resolve or determine dispute – For the purpose of avoiding undue delay and expense, a person to whom the overarching obligations apply must not take any step in connection with any claim or response to any claim in a civil proceeding unless the person reasonably believes that the step is necessary to facilitate the resolution or determination of the proceeding”.
“20 Overarching obligation to cooperate in the conduct of civil proceeding – A person to whom the overarching obligations apply must cooperate with the parties to a civil proceeding and the court in connection with the conduct of that proceeding”.
“21 Overarching obligation not to mislead or deceive – A person to whom the overarching obligations apply must not, in respect of a civil proceeding, engage in conduct which is—(a) misleading or deceptive; or (b) likelyto mislead or deceive”
“22 Overarching obligation to use reasonable endeavours to resolve dispute – A person to whom the overarching obligations apply must use reasonable endeavours to resolve a dispute by agreement between the persons in dispute, including, if appropriate, by appropriate dispute resolution, unless—(a) it is not in the interests of justice to do so; or (b) the dispute is of such a nature that only judicial determination is appropriate. …”
“23 Overarching obligation to narrow the issues in dispute – If a person to whom the overarching obligations apply cannot resolve a dispute wholly by agreement, the person must use reasonable endeavours to—(a) resolve by agreement any issues in dispute which can be resolved in that way; and (b) narrow the scope of the remaining issues in dispute— unless—(c) it is not in the interests of justice to do so; or (d) the dispute is of such a nature that only judicial determination is appropriate”.
“24 Overarching obligation to ensure costs are reasonable and proportionate – A person to whom the overarching obligations apply must use reasonable endeavours to ensure that legal costs and other costs incurred in connection with the civil proceeding are reasonable and proportionate to— (a) the complexity or importance of the issues in dispute; and (b) the amount in dispute”.
“25 Overarching obligation to minimise delay – For the purpose of ensuring the prompt conduct of a civil proceeding, a person to whom the overarching obligations apply must use reasonable endeavours in connection with the civil proceeding to— (a) act promptly; and (b) minimise delay”.
“26 Overarching obligation to disclose existence of documents: (1) Subject to subsection (3), a person to whom the overarching obligations apply must disclose to each party the existence of all documents that are, or have been, in that person’s possession, custody or control— (a) of which the person is aware; and (b) which the person considers, or ought reasonably consider, are critical to the resolution of the dispute. (2) Disclosure under subsection (1) must occur at— (a) the earliest reasonable time after the person becomes aware of the existence of the document; or (b) such other time as a court may direct. … (4) The overarching obligation imposed by this section—(a) is an ongoing obligation for the duration of the civil proceeding; and (b) does not limit or affect a party’s obligations in relation to discovery”.
“29 Court may make certain orders: (1) If a court is satisfied that, on the balance of probabilities, a person has contravened any overarching obligation, the court may make any order it considers appropriate in the interests of justice including, but not limited to—(a) an order that the person pay some or all of the legal costs or other costs or expenses of any person arising from the contravention of the overarching obligation; (b) an order that the legal costs or other costs or expenses of any person be payable immediately and be enforceable immediately; (c) an order that the person compensate any person for any financial loss or other loss which was materially contributed to by the contravention of the overarching obligation, including— (i) an order for penalty interest in accordance with the penalty interest rate in respect of any delay in the payment of an amount claimed in the civil proceeding; or (ii) an order for no interest or reduced interest; (d) an order that the person take any steps specified in the order which are reasonably necessary to remedy any contravention of the overarching obligations by the person; (e) an order that the person not be permitted to take specified steps in the civil proceeding; (f) any other order that the court considers to be in the interests of any person who has been prejudicially affected by the contravention of the overarching obligations. (2) An order under this section may be made— (a) on the application of— (i) any party to the civil proceeding; or (ii) any other person who, in the opinion of the court, has a sufficient interest in the proceeding; or (b) on the court’s own motion. (3) This section does not limit any other power of a court to make any order, including any order as to costs”.
“30 Applications for orders under section 29: (1) An application for an order under section 29 is to be made—(a) in the court in which the civil proceeding was, or is being, heard; and (b) in accordance with the rules of court. (2) An application for an order under section 29 must be made prior to the finalisation of the civil proceeding to which the application relates (excluding any period for appeals). (3) For the purposes of subsection (2), if an order, including an order in respect of costs, is made after the date of finalisation of the civil proceeding to which the application relates, the date of making of the last of the orders is taken to be the date of finalisation of that proceeding”.
The Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 state [emphasis mine]:
“13.08 Subsequent fact – A party may plead any fact or matter which has arisen at any time, whether before or since the commencement of the proceeding”.
“13.10 Particulars of pleading: (1) Every pleading shall contain the necessary particulars of any fact or matter pleaded. (2) Without limiting paragraph (1), particulars shall be given if they are necessary— (a) to enable the opposite party to plead; or (b) to define the questions for trial; or (c) to avoid surprise at trial. (3) Without limiting paragraph (1), every pleading shall contain particulars of any—(a) misrepresentation, fraud, breach of trust, wilful default or undue influence; or (b) disorder or disability of the mind, malice, fraudulent intention or other condition of the mind, including knowledge or notice—which is alleged”.
The Australian Consumer Law and Trade Practices Act at s92 refers to a “serious offence” as:
“(a) fraud; [and] (b) dishonesty”.
[1] These Rules were in force as being legally binding at the time the barristers were involved in the actions in which I was involved, but have since replaced by the almost identical Legal Profession Uniform Conduct (Barristers) Rules 2015 – which are subject to the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014)
[2] The entirety of all known work of Barrister ABC (a short-term pseudonym required by court action) and Peake was prior to 2014. Kaye’s work other than ad hoc work, was prior to 2014. Southall’s and Spencer’s work commenced well before the repeal.
[3] A Law Council of Australia document.