De Simone v Legal Services Board

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE
COMMON LAW DIVISION

S CI 2013 01485

GUISEPPE DE SIMONE & OTHERS (according to the schedule attached)	Plaintiffs
v
LEGAL SERVICES BOARD	Defendant
- and -
MICHAEL RICHARD BRERETON & OTHERS (according to the schedule attached)	Third Parties

---

JUDGE:	DERHAM AsJ
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	16 May 2014
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	30 January 2015
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	De Simone v Legal Services Board & Ors
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2015] VSC 9	First Revision: 11 March 2015

---

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application to examine a non-party before trial under r 40.12 and r 41.01 of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules2005 – Examination for the purposes of discovery of documents – Application not valid use of the Rules.

SUBPOENA – Objections by defendant and Legal Services Commissioner to plaintiffs inspecting documents produced under subpoena issued pursuant to Order 42A by former inspector authorised under the Legal Practice Act1996 and Legal Profession Act2004 – Objections based on public interest immunity, client legal privilege and relevance – Objections upheld.

PUBLIC INTEREST IMMUNITY – Principles applicable to documents relating to or arising out of investigations by an inspector/investigator appointed under the Legal Practice Act1996 and Legal Profession Act2004 – Whether a class claim or a contents clam – Contents claim only – Balancing the public interest in the confidentiality of the documents against the relevance of the documents to the issues in the proceeding – Whether the documents contain ‘material evidence’ – Documents insufficiently relevant to warrant disclosure to plaintiffs.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Plaintiffs	Mr A Sandbach	Peter S Lustig, Solicitor
For the Defendant	Mr S R Senathirajah	Mr Ned Roche, Solicitor Legal Services Board
For the First Third Party	Mr J Waters, solicitor	John Waters, Solicitor
For the Legal Services Commissioner	Ms L Kirwan	Corrs Chambers Westgarth

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 1

Background......................................................................................................................................... 2

The Collendina Project and the Disciplinary Proceedings..................................................... 3

The Fidelity Fund Claim and Defence....................................................................................... 5

Ronald Hall.................................................................................................................................... 8

The Hall Subpoena.......................................................................................................................... 11

Affidavits........................................................................................................................................... 12

Examination of Mr Hall................................................................................................................... 15

Plaintiffs’ Submissions............................................................................................................... 15

Board’s Submissions................................................................................................................... 17

Analysis and Consideration...................................................................................................... 19

The Rules............................................................................................................................ 19

Objections to inspection of subpoenaed documents................................................................ 23

Plaintiffs’ Submissions............................................................................................................... 23

The Legal Services Board’s Submissions................................................................................ 26

The Legal Services Commissioner’s Submissions................................................................. 28

Analysis and Consideration...................................................................................................... 31

The Secrecy Provisions..................................................................................................... 31

Public Interest Immunity.................................................................................................. 33

Client Legal Privilege....................................................................................................... 39

Order 42A Subpoena – for evidence............................................................................... 39

Protected Documents........................................................................................................ 40

Conclusions....................................................................................................................................... 44

SCHEDULE......................................................................................................................................... 1

Protected Documents......................................................................................................................... 1

HIS HONOUR:

Introduction

1. There were two applications before the Court, both referred by the Judge in Charge of the Professional Liability List.  They were:

(a) An application pursuant to Rule 40.12 and/or 41.01 of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 (‘the Rules’) for Mr Ronald Hall, formerly an investigator engaged by the Legal Services Commissioner (‘Commissioner’), to give evidence before the trial of the proceeding for the purpose of discovery;…