Re Harrison: Application for Readmission

In this case, the applicant, previously admitted to the legal profession but later struck off due to serious professional misconduct, seeks readmission. The applicant, who had been admitted for approximately ten years and was 47 years old at the time of the misconduct, engaged in actions that the Board of Examiners deemed dishonest and deceptive, amounting to a serious departure from professional standards. Over twenty years have passed since the applicant's misconduct, during which time he has been employed by trade unions and has practised as a lay advocate and legal officer in industrial law without any reported adverse conduct. The applicant has also provided affidavits supporting his character and remorse for his past actions.

The court was tasked with determining whether the applicant's past conduct warranted continued disqualification from the legal profession. This involved assessing the seriousness of the misconduct, the applicant's subsequent conduct and employment history, and whether public confidence in the legal profession would be undermined by his readmission. The court also had to consider the applicant's frankness during the previous application for readmission, as well as his current age and the passage of time since the original misconduct.

The court concluded that while the misconduct was serious, the applicant's subsequent conduct and the passage of time were significant mitigating factors. The lack of adverse comments during his employment and the positive affidavits provided in support of his character and remorse were also considered. The court found that the applicant had demonstrated the requisite change in character and circumstances to warrant his readmission to the legal profession.

The final orders of the court were to admit the applicant to the legal profession, subject to certain conditions, thereby reinstating his eligibility to practise law.