Cinar v Law Society of Tasmania

Cinar, the applicant, sought a practising certificate from the Law Society of Tasmania, but the society refused to issue one to him. The society based its decision on a statutory requirement that mandated a condition permitting only supervised legal practice as an employee or partner. Cinar aimed to practice as a barrister under pupillage. The Supreme Court of Tasmania was the forum for this dispute.
The legal issues that the court had to address involved interpreting the statutory requirement and determining its implications for Cinar's application for a practising certificate. The primary question was whether the statutory condition imposed by the Law Society of Tasmania was consistent with the statutory framework governing legal practice in the state.
The court examined the statutory provisions and concluded that the condition imposed by the Law Society of Tasmania was not permissible under the relevant legislation. The court found that the statutory requirement did not explicitly or implicitly allow for the imposition of conditions that would restrict the applicant's ability to practice as a barrister under pupillage. The court held that the condition was an unauthorised limitation on the applicant's right to practise law and, therefore, invalid. As a result, the society's refusal to issue a practising certificate to Cinar was unlawful.
The Supreme Court of Tasmania ordered the Law Society of Tasmania to issue a practising certificate to Cinar, without any conditions restricting his ability to practice as a barrister under pupillage. The court also noted that the society's refusal to grant the certificate was unlawful and constituted an interference with Cinar's right to practise law.