Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of New South Wales v Hendrick Jan van Es

The Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of New South Wales applied to the Court for declarations that Mr Hendrick Jan van Es was not a person of good fame and character and not a fit and proper person to remain on the Local Roll of Lawyers. The Prothonotary contended that Mr van Es had attempted to gain an unfair advantage during the Legal Ethics for Barristers examination administered by the NSW Bar Association through deceitful conduct, and subsequently lied to Bar Association officers when explaining his actions.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether Mr van Es's conduct demonstrated that he was not a person of good fame and character, and consequently, not a fit and proper person to remain on the Roll of Local Lawyers. This involved assessing the nature and quality of his actions during the examination and his subsequent explanations to the Bar Association.

The Court, by consent orders, declared that Mr van Es was not a person of good fame and character and was not a fit and proper person to remain on the Local Roll of Lawyers. The Court's reasoning, based on agreed factual premises, established that Mr van Es had deceitfully brought and referred to unauthorised materials during the examination, attempted to conceal these materials from the invigilator, and refused examination of the materials. Furthermore, he had falsely denied these actions and any wrongdoing to Bar Association officers. This conduct was found to establish his present unfitness to practise.

Consequently, the Court ordered that the name of Mr Hendrick Jan van Es be removed from the Local Roll of Lawyers of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Mr van Es was also ordered to pay the Prothonotary's costs of $11,000.00.