Barlow v The Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory

Barlow (the applicant) sought judicial review of a decision by the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory (the respondent) to refuse his application for a practising certificate. The applicant had previously been struck off the roll of legal practitioners in New South Wales and had subsequently been admitted to practice in the Australian Capital Territory. The core of the dispute concerned the Law Society's assessment of the applicant's fitness to hold a practising certificate, particularly in light of his prior disciplinary history.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Law Society had erred in law or in fact in refusing the applicant's application for a practising certificate. This required the Court to consider the scope of the Law Society's discretion under the relevant legislation, the nature of the assessment of "fitness and propriety" for admission to practice, and the weight to be given to the applicant's past conduct in determining his current suitability. The Court also had to determine if the Law Society had adequately considered all relevant material and had applied the correct legal principles in reaching its decision.

In its reasoning, the Court emphasised that the assessment of fitness and propriety is an ongoing one, and past conduct, even if it occurred some time ago, remains relevant. The Court found that the Law Society had not erred in its assessment, noting that the applicant's prior disbarment was a significant factor that could not be disregarded. The Court applied the principles of administrative law, requiring the Law Society to act reasonably and to have regard to all relevant considerations. The Court concluded that the Law Society had properly exercised its discretion and had not acted unfairly or unreasonably in refusing the application.

The Court therefore dismissed the application for judicial review.