Legal Practitioner v Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 2)

In the matter of *Legal Practitioner v Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 2)*, Elkaim J of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory considered an application by a legal practitioner seeking to amend orders previously entered by a Deputy Registrar. The legal practitioner alleged bias and improper execution in relation to those orders and also sought a stay of the orders. The respondent was the Council of the Law Society of the ACT.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the Deputy Registrar's orders should be amended due to alleged bias and improper execution, and whether a stay of those orders should be granted. The Court was required to determine the appropriate course of action in light of these allegations and the applicant's request for relief.

Elkaim J dismissed the application to amend the orders, except to the extent that the enforcement of costs orders in favour of the respondent, arising from earlier orders made by Acting Justice Robinson, was stayed. This stay was conditional upon the applicant's pursuit of an appeal to the High Court. Specifically, the stay would remain in effect until 28 days after any decision by the High Court refusing special leave to appeal, or if special leave was granted, until after the subsequent appeal to the High Court was dismissed. The Court also ordered that if the applicant was successful in having the security for costs orders overturned in the High Court, they would have leave to relist the matters in the Supreme Court. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the application, but this costs order was also stayed on the same terms as the stay of the substantive orders.