Legal Services Commissioner v Moore - [2021] QSC 280

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Legal Services Commissioner v Moore [2021] QSC 280

PARTIES:

LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSIONER

(applicant)

v
NERISE DAWN MOORE

(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

BS 10541 of 2021

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

5 November 2021

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

12 October 2021; supplementary outline of argument on behalf of the applicant dated 13 October 2021; further supplementary outline of argument on behalf of the applicant dated 21 October 2021

JUDGE:

Burns J

ORDER:

THE ORDER OF THE COURT IS THAT:

1. Pursuant to s 133(1) of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld), the respondent is permanently disqualified from managing a corporation that is an incorporated legal practice.

2. The respondent shall pay the applicant’s costs of the application to be assessed on the standard basis.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – UNQUALIFIED PERSONS AND DISQUALIFIED PRACTITIONERS – GENERALLY – where the applicant Commissioner sought an order pursuant to s 133(1) of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) disqualifying the respondent from managing an incorporated legal practice – whether the respondent had engaged in conduct capable of supporting a disqualification under ss 206C, 206D, 206E or 206F of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) from managing corporations – whether disqualification of the respondent from managing an incorporated legal practice is otherwise justified – whether any such disqualification should be permanent

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 180, s 181, s 182, s 206C, s 1317E
Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld), s 3, s 6, s 24, s 25, s 111, s 117, s 118, s 119, s 133, s 261, s 703
Legal Profession Regulation 2017 (Qld), reg 14, reg 31, reg 34, reg 35, reg 37, reg 39, reg 42, reg 44, reg 50, reg 53

Angas Law Services Pty Ltd (in liq) v Carabelas (2005) 226 CLR 50, cited
ASIC v Vocation Ltd (2019) 371 ALR 15, cited
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Elm Financial Services Pty Ltd (2005) 55 ACSR 544, cited
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Managed Investments Ltd (No 10) [2017] QSC 96, cited
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v White (2006) 58 ACSR 261, cited
Australian Securities Commission v Donovan (1998) 28 ACSR 583, cited
Binns v Gardiner (2004) 151 A Crim R 1, cited
Cassimatis v ASIC (2020) 376 ALR 261, cited
Chew v The Queen (1991) 4 WAR 21, cited
Doyle v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (2005) 227 CLR 18, cited
Kyriackou v Law Institute of Victoria (2014) 45 VR 540, cited
Legal Services Commissioner v Walter [2011] QSC 132, cited
R v Byrnes (1995) 183 CLR 501, cited
R v Tunde-Olarinde (1967) 51 Cr App Rep 249, cited
Re HIH Insurance Ltd; ASIC v Adler (2002) 42 ACSR 80, cited
Re Idylic Solutions Pty Ltd; ASIC v Hobbs & Ors (2013) 93 ACSR 421, cited
Rich v ASIC (2004) 220 CLR 129, cited
Strategic…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Legal Services Commissioner v Moore and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2021] QSC 280
Decision Date: 5 November 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Legal Services Commissioner v Moore, the Legal Services Commissioner sought to disqualify the respondent, Moore, from managing an incorporated legal practice. Moore had been found guilty of multiple breaches of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld), prompting the Commissioner's application under section 133(1) of the Legal Profession Act. The court was required to determine whether Moore's conduct warranted disqualification from managing corporations and whether such disqualification should be permanent.

The legal issues centred on whether Moore's conduct met the criteria for disqualification under sections 206C, 206D, 206E, or 206F of the Corporations Act, and if so, whether this warranted disqualification from managing an incorporated legal practice. The court examined the nature and severity of Moore's breaches, including dishonest conduct and contraventions of the legal profession’s ethical standards.

In reaching its decision, the court meticulously reviewed the evidence of Moore's misconduct and the implications of such conduct on public confidence in the legal profession. The court found that Moore's actions were not only inconsistent with the professional standards expected of a legal practitioner but also posed a significant risk to the integrity of the legal services market. Consequently, the court concluded that permanent disqualification was warranted to protect the public interest and maintain the standards of the legal profession.

The orders made by the court were that Moore is permanently disqualified from managing any corporation that is an incorporated legal practice. Additionally, Moore was ordered to pay the Legal Services Commissioner’s costs of the application, to be assessed on the standard basis.

Orders

Orders of the court

THE ORDER OF THE COURT IS THAT:

1. Pursuant to s 133(1) of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld), the respondent is permanently disqualified from managing a corporation that is an incorporated legal practice.

2. The respondent shall pay the applicant’s costs of the application to be assessed on the standard basis.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Legal Services Commissioner v Moore [2021] QSC 280
PARTIES:	LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSIONER (applicant) v NERISE DAWN MOORE (respondent)
FILE NO/S:	BS 10541 of 2021
DIVISION:	Trial Division
PROCEEDING:	Application
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	5 November 2021
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	12 October 2021; supplementary outline of argument on behalf of the applicant dated 13 October 2021; further supplementary outline of argument on behalf of the applicant dated 21 October 2021
JUDGE:	Burns J
ORDER:	THE ORDER OF THE COURT IS THAT: *1. Pursuant to s 133(1) of the Legal Profession Act 2007* (Qld), the respondent is permanently disqualified from managing a corporation that is an incorporated legal practice. 2. The respondent shall pay the applicant’s costs of the application to be assessed on the standard basis.**
CATCHWORDS:	PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LAWYERS – UNQUALIFIED PERSONS AND DISQUALIFIED PRACTITIONERS – GENERALLY – where the applicant Commissioner sought an order pursuant to s 133(1) of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) disqualifying the respondent from managing an incorporated legal practice – whether the respondent had engaged in conduct capable of supporting a disqualification under ss 206C, 206D, 206E or 206F of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) from managing corporations – whether disqualification of the respondent from managing an incorporated legal practice is otherwise justified – whether any such disqualification should be permanent Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 180, s 181, s 182, s 206C, s 1317E Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld), s 3, s 6, s 24, s 25, s 111, s 117, s 118, s 119, s 133, s 261, s 703 Legal Profession Regulation 2017 (Qld), reg 14, reg 31, reg 34, reg 35, reg 37, reg 39, reg 42, reg 44, reg 50, reg 53 Angas Law Services Pty Ltd (in liq) v Carabelas (2005) 226 CLR 50, cited ASIC v Vocation Ltd (2019) 371 ALR 15, cited Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Elm Financial Services Pty Ltd (2005) 55 ACSR 544, cited Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Managed Investments Ltd (No 10) [2017] QSC 96, cited Australian Securities and Investments Commission v White (2006) 58 ACSR 261, cited Australian Securities Commission v Donovan (1998) 28 ACSR 583, cited Binns v Gardiner (2004) 151 A Crim R 1, cited Cassimatis v ASIC (2020) 376 ALR 261, cited Chew v The Queen (1991) 4 WAR 21, cited Doyle v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (2005) 227 CLR 18, cited Kyriackou v Law Institute of Victoria (2014) 45 VR 540, cited Legal Services Commissioner v Walter [2011] QSC 132, cited R v Byrnes (1995) 183 CLR 501, cited R v Tunde-Olarinde (1967) 51 Cr App Rep 249, cited Re HIH Insurance Ltd; ASIC v Adler (2002) 42 ACSR 80, cited Re Idylic Solutions Pty Ltd; ASIC v Hobbs & Ors (2013) 93 ACSR 421, cited Rich v ASIC (2004) 220 CLR 129, cited Strategic…