Legal Practitioners Conduct Board v Viscariello (No 2)

In *Legal Practitioners Conduct Board v Viscariello (No 2)*, the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia considered applications by a legal practitioner for suppression of the Court's reasons and orders, and for a stay of an order striking him off the roll of legal practitioners. The practitioner had been found guilty of unprofessional conduct by the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal, which included making false and dishonest statements in court and to the Tribunal. The Court had previously dismissed the practitioner's appeal against these findings and an subsequent application to reopen that appeal.

The central legal issues before the Full Court were whether the practitioner's private interest in obtaining a suppression order outweighed the public interest in open justice, and whether his private interest in a stay of the strike-off order outweighed the public interest in the formalisation and publication of the Court's decision. The Court was also asked to consider an application for an adjournment of the strike-off hearing pending the practitioner's intended application for special leave to appeal to the High Court.

The Court reasoned that the principle of open justice is a fundamental aspect of the administration of justice and that a practitioner seeking to depart from this principle bears a heavy onus. The Court found that the practitioner had not discharged this onus, as his private interests did not outweigh the strong public interest in transparency and accountability within the legal profession. Similarly, the Court determined that a stay of the strike-off order was not warranted at that stage, as it would undermine the Court's judgment and the public interest. However, to allow the practitioner an opportunity to seek a stay from the High Court pending his special leave application, the Court granted an interim stay of 28 days.