Legal Practitioner v Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 3)

In *Legal Practitioner v Council of the Law Society of the ACT (No 3)*, heard before Robinson AJ in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, a legal practitioner sought to vary existing orders by extending the time for compliance with a self-executing costs order. The dispute arose after the period for the legal practitioner to provide security for the Law Society's costs of appeals had expired.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether it possessed the jurisdiction to extend the time for compliance with a self-executing order, particularly after the stipulated compliance period had already passed. This involved an examination of the court's inherent powers and the application of relevant procedural rules, specifically Rule 6351 of the Supreme Court Rules.

Robinson AJ reasoned that while the Court generally has inherent jurisdiction to control its own process and ensure the administration of justice, this power is not unfettered. The Court considered the nature of a self-executing order and the implications of extending time after its expiry. Ultimately, the Court found it had the power to grant an extension in this specific instance, albeit with limitations.

The Court ordered that the time for the Legal Practitioner to give security in the amount of $80,000 for the costs of the Law Society of the appeals be extended until 17 May 2017. However, the application was otherwise dismissed, and the costs of this particular application were to be costs in the main appeal.