Pennisi v Legal Services Commissioner

The appellant, Pennisi, appealed against orders made by the Legal Services Commissioner Tribunal in Queensland, which involved charges of professional misconduct and unsatisfactory professional conduct. Pennisi had successfully contested the first charge but admitted to conduct that amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct under the second charge. Consequently, he was publicly reprimanded and ordered to pay a penalty and the Commissioner’s costs concerning the second charge. Pennisi challenged the tribunal's decision to award the Commissioner costs in relation to the first charge, arguing that the tribunal had misinterpreted the term "exceptional circumstances" in s 462(1) of the Legal Profession Act 2007, or had failed to properly distinguish between the two charges. The central legal issue before the court was whether the tribunal had erred in making the costs order regarding the first charge.

The court found that the tribunal had indeed erred in its interpretation of "exceptional circumstances" as it did not align with the ordinary meaning of the phrase. Additionally, the tribunal failed to adequately separate the two charges when making its costs order. The court held that the tribunal's failure to distinguish between the charges led to an improper costs order concerning the first charge. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the costs order related to the first charge, and ordered the Commissioner to pay Pennisi's costs of the appeal. The court proposed to substitute the tribunal's order with one where Pennisi would pay the costs of the second charge, but no costs would be ordered for the first charge, pending any submissions from the parties within seven days. If no submissions are received, the court will finalise the orders accordingly.