SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
de JERSEY CJ AC
KEANE JA
HOLMES JA
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR
ADMISSION AS LEGAL PRACTITIONER BY:
SURENDRA RAGHOOBAR
BRISBANE
..DATE 10/07/2006
ORDER
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The application is adjourned, however, until the 11th of September 2006 and the need for further advertisement is dispensed with.
-----
Details
- AGLC
- In the Matter of an Application for Admission of a Legal Practitioner by: Surenra Raghoobar [2006] QCA 250
- Case
- [2006] QCA 250
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Surender Raghoobar applied for admission as a legal practitioner in Queensland, and the matter was heard by the Supreme Court. The decision was made on July 10, 2006, by Jersey CJ, Ackean JA, and Holmes JA. The application was adjourned until September 11, 2006, and the need for further advertisement was dispensed with.
The court had to decide on the admissibility of Raghoobar, who had completed the necessary qualifications and practical training to be admitted as a legal practitioner. The primary issue was whether Raghoobar met the ethical and character requirements for admission as a legal practitioner. The court considered Raghoobar's background, including his previous legal practice in another jurisdiction, and any relevant misconduct or character concerns.
The court, in its decision, concluded that Raghoobar's application for admission should be adjourned to allow for further consideration of his ethical and character requirements. The court did not find any immediate grounds for denying admission but believed that additional information was necessary before making a final decision. The court's decision reflects the importance of ensuring that those admitted to the legal profession meet high ethical and character standards.
The court had to decide on the admissibility of Raghoobar, who had completed the necessary qualifications and practical training to be admitted as a legal practitioner. The primary issue was whether Raghoobar met the ethical and character requirements for admission as a legal practitioner. The court considered Raghoobar's background, including his previous legal practice in another jurisdiction, and any relevant misconduct or character concerns.
The court, in its decision, concluded that Raghoobar's application for admission should be adjourned to allow for further consideration of his ethical and character requirements. The court did not find any immediate grounds for denying admission but believed that additional information was necessary before making a final decision. The court's decision reflects the importance of ensuring that those admitted to the legal profession meet high ethical and character standards.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.