Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory v Burns

The Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory brought an application for the removal of Diana Mary Burns from the roll of people admitted to the legal profession. The application was by consent and was brought to the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The dispute centred around whether Burns was a fit and proper person to remain on the roll, given her conduct.

The court needed to determine the legal basis for removing a lawyer from the roll and whether it was necessary to record specific findings when the conduct did not fall under the specific provisions of the Legal Profession Act 2006 (ACT). The court also needed to decide whether the Supreme Court had the inherent jurisdiction to discipline and control lawyers, including the power to remove them from the roll.

The court found that the Supreme Court had the inherent jurisdiction to control and discipline lawyers, including the power to remove them from the roll. The court held that it was not necessary to record specific findings when the conduct did not fall under the specific provisions of the Legal Profession Act 2006 (ACT). The court found that Burns' conduct was dishonest and misleading, and she had been untruthful with the Law Society. The court found that Burns was not a fit and proper person to remain on the roll, and her name was removed.

Diana Mary Burns' name was removed from the roll of people admitted to the legal profession under the Legal Profession Act 2006 (ACT) maintained by the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. Diana Mary Burns was ordered to pay the costs of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory, which were to be assessed or agreed.