Prothonotary v Comeskey

The Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of New South Wales brought proceedings against Christopher Patrick Comeskey, a lawyer registered in New South Wales under the *Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition Act 1997* (Cth). The dispute concerned Mr. Comeskey's failure to disclose his suspension from legal practice in New Zealand and his pleas of guilty to criminal offences in that jurisdiction, as well as making false statements in his application for a practising certificate in New South Wales. The matter was heard by Basten, Macfarlan and Simpson JJA of the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether Mr. Comeskey's conduct constituted professional misconduct, whether he was a person of good fame and character, and consequently, whether he was a fit and proper person to remain on the roll of Australian Lawyers. The central issue was the impact of his non-disclosure and criminal convictions on his suitability to practise law in New South Wales, notwithstanding his registration under the Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition scheme.

The Court found that Mr. Comeskey's failure to disclose his New Zealand suspension and criminal convictions, and the false statements made in his application, demonstrated a lack of honesty and integrity. The Court applied the principles that a lawyer must be of good fame and character and a fit and proper person to practise law, and that disclosure of relevant information is a fundamental obligation. The Court concluded that Mr. Comeskey's conduct fell short of the standards expected of legal practitioners.

The Court declared that Christopher Patrick Comeskey was guilty of professional misconduct, was not a person of good fame and character, and was not a fit and proper person to remain on the roll of Australian Lawyers. Accordingly, the Court directed that his name be removed from the roll and ordered him to pay the Prothonotary's costs.