DEAN -v- LEGAL PRACTICE BOARD [2016] WASCA 63 (S)

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2016] WASCA 63 (S)
Court:	THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)	Published:	09/06/2016
Case No:	CACR:147/2015	Heard:	ON THE PAPERS
Coram:	McLURE P BUSS JA MAZZA JA	Delivered:	9/06/16
No of pages:	4	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	JAMES DEAN MARK JEFFREY SIMONSEN LEGAL PRACTICE BOARD
Catchwords:	Criminal law Unqualified persons engaged in legal practice Aiding an unqualified person to engage in legal practice Convictions, sentences and costs orders recorded in the Magistrates Court of Western Australia Application for leave to appeal against decisions of a single judge of the Supreme Court dismissed by the Court of Appeal Appeals dismissed Final orders perfected Subsequent application by appellant to reopen the appeals in order to seek a spent conviction order
Legislation:	Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 39(2)(c), s 45(1)
Case References:	Dean v Legal Practice Board [2016] WASCA 63 JS v The State of Western Australia [2014] WASCA 177

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA) CITATION : DEAN -v- LEGAL PRACTICE BOARD [2016] WASCA 63 (S) CORAM : McLURE P

BUSS JA

MAZZA JA

HEARD : ON THE PAPERS DELIVERED : 9 JUNE 2016 PUBLISHED : 9 JUNE 2016 FILE NO/S : CACR 147 of 2015 BETWEEN : JAMES DEAN

MARK JEFFREY SIMONSEN

Appellants

AND

LEGAL PRACTICE BOARD

Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : MARTINO J

Citation : DEAN -v- LEGAL PRACTICE BOARD [2015] WASC 260

File No : SJA 1026 of 2014

Catchwords:

Criminal law - Unqualified persons engaged in legal practice - Aiding an unqualified person to engage in legal practice - Convictions, sentences and costs orders recorded in the Magistrates Court of Western Australia - Application for leave to appeal against decisions of a single judge of the Supreme Court dismissed by the Court of Appeal - Appeals dismissed - Final orders perfected - Subsequent application by appellant to reopen the appeals in order to seek a spent conviction order

Legislation:

Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 39(2)(c), s 45(1)

Result:

Application dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellants : No appearance (on the papers)

Respondent : No appearance (on the papers)

Solicitors:

Appellants : In person

Respondent : Legal Practice Board

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Dean v Legal Practice Board [2016] WASCA 63
JS v The State of Western Australia [2014] WASCA 177

1 McLURE P: I agree with Mazza JA.

2 BUSS JA: I agree with Mazza JA.

3 MAZZA JA: It appears from correspondence received by the court from Mr Simonsen that he wishes to reopen his appeals in order to seek a spent conviction order.

4 On 18 April 2016, final orders were signed and sealed by the Acting Court of Appeal Registrar, and a Certificate of Conclusion of Criminal Appeal was issued, in accordance with this court's reasons in Dean…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Dean v Legal Practice Board and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2016] WASCA 63 (S)
Decision Date: 9 JUNE 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in this case were Dean, the appellant, and the Legal Practice Board, the respondent. Dean sought to challenge the decisions of the Supreme Court of Western Australia, which had dismissed his appeal against the Legal Practice Board. The dispute centred around Dean's involvement in aiding an unqualified person to engage in legal practice, for which he had been convicted in the Magistrates Court of Western Australia. The appeals to the Supreme Court and subsequently to the Court of Appeal were dismissed, and Dean now sought to reopen the appeals to seek a spent conviction order.

The legal issues that the court was required to decide included whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to entertain the application for leave to appeal against the decisions of the Supreme Court, and if so, whether the appeal should be allowed. The court also needed to consider whether Dean's application to reopen the appeals was permissible under the law, and if so, whether it should be granted.

The court held that the Court of Appeal did not have jurisdiction to entertain the application for leave to appeal against the decisions of the Supreme Court, as the appeal had already been dismissed. The court found that the application to reopen the appeals was not permissible under the law, as the appeals had already been dismissed, and the final orders had been perfected. The court held that the appellant's application to reopen the appeals was an abuse of process, and the application was dismissed.

The final orders of the court were that the application to reopen the appeals was dismissed, and the appeals were considered to be closed. The court held that the appellant's application to seek a spent conviction order was not possible, as the appeals had already been dismissed, and the final orders had been perfected. The court found that the appellant had no further rights to appeal the decisions of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application dismissed

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.