Keung v Abbott

This case concerned an appeal by Dr Keung against a decision of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal. The respondents, lawyers from Piper Alderman, had acted for Dr Keung and Australian Medic-Care Company Ltd (AMC) in Federal Court proceedings and subsequent fee disputes. Dr Keung had made complaints to the Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner (the Commissioner) regarding the conduct of the respondents, which the Commissioner had previously investigated and found no unsatisfactory or unprofessional conduct. Dr Keung then sought to lay charges before the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal, and subsequently on appeal, was whether Dr Keung's application to lay charges was out of time, and if so, whether an extension should be granted. The Tribunal considered the applicable limitation periods under the *Legal Practitioners Act* and whether a discretion existed to extend time. A further issue on appeal was Dr Keung's renewed application to amend his notice of appeal.

The Tribunal dismissed Dr Keung's application for an extension of time, finding that a five-year limitation period applied and that, even if a later amended provision applied, the time for laying charges had lapsed. The Tribunal declined to exercise its discretion to extend time, noting the substantial delay, the lack of adequate explanation for the delay, and Dr Keung's awareness of his right to lay charges before the Tribunal for over 2.5 years. The Tribunal found that Dr Keung had made a deliberate decision to pursue other avenues rather than lay charges before the Tribunal, and that this pursuit appeared to be a means to obtain specific reports.

The appeal was heard by Kourakis CJ, Kelly and Hinton JJ. The Court refused Dr Keung's application to amend his notice of appeal. The appeal was dismissed.