Jordan v Crown Solicitor

Jordan (the applicant) sought judicial review of a decision by the Crown Solicitor (the respondent) to refuse to grant him a practising certificate. The applicant had previously been struck off the roll of legal practitioners in New South Wales and had been convicted of offences under the *Legal Profession Act 1987* (NSW) for practising law while unqualified. The applicant argued that the Crown Solicitor’s decision was affected by an error of law, specifically that the respondent had failed to consider the applicant’s submissions regarding the extraterritoriality of the offences for which he was convicted. The matter came before the Supreme Court of South Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Crown Solicitor, in considering the application for a practising certificate, was required to determine the question of the extraterritoriality of the applicant’s prior convictions. The applicant contended that if the offences were found to have an extraterritorial element, they might not be considered relevant for the purposes of assessing his fitness to hold a practising certificate in South Australia. The Court also considered the scope of the Crown Solicitor's discretion in granting practising certificates and the weight to be given to past professional misconduct.

The Court held that the Crown Solicitor was not required to embark on an inquiry into the extraterritoriality of the applicant’s prior convictions. The relevant legislation conferred a broad discretion on the Crown Solicitor to refuse a practising certificate where an applicant had been struck off the roll or convicted of certain offences, irrespective of the geographical location where those events occurred. The Court reasoned that the purpose of the legislation was to protect the public and maintain the integrity of the legal profession, and that past serious misconduct, such as practising while unqualified and being struck off, was inherently relevant to an applicant's fitness to practise, regardless of the specific jurisdictional circumstances of that misconduct. The Court found that the Crown Solicitor had properly exercised their discretion by considering the applicant's history of professional misconduct.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.