Lashansky v Legal Practitioners Complaints Committee

Case

[2006] HCATrans 481

No judgment structure available for this case.

[2006] HCATrans 481

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Perth  No P62 of 2005

B e t w e e n -

ROBERT JAMES LASHANSKY

Applicant

and

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GUMMOW J
HEYDON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON TUESDAY, 5 SEPTEMBER 2006, AT 9.24 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J:   The applicant was a solicitor.  The Western Australian Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) decided that he lacked understanding of his obligations, said he was unfit to practise, and suspended him from practice.

The applicant sought to appeal against this decision, but delayed in preparing and entering the appeal for hearing.  The Full Court (Malcolm CJ, Steytler and Templeman JJ) dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution, and said that it appeared to be without merit.

The applicant then filed a motion seeking reinstatement of the appeal.  The Court of Appeal (Wheeler and McLure JJA, Miller AJA) dismissed this motion on the ground that there was no power to reopen the Full Court’s decision.  It also said that no error had been shown in the Full Court’s reasoning.

We have considered the materials provided in support of the special leave application and in support of an application to defer the listing of today’s disposition.  The applicant’s special leave application is vexatious and embarrassing in the legal sense of those terms.  It would be futile to grant special leave, since the applicant has not demonstrated any error in the reasoning of either the Full Court or the Court of Appeal.  There is no ground for the deferral of the listing of this disposition.

Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application for special leave.  I publish the disposition signed by Heydon J and myself.

AT 9.25 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED

Areas of Law

  • Administrative Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Natural Justice

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Statutory Construction

  • Appeal

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0