Roulstone v New South Wales Bar Association

The plaintiff, Mr Roulstone, sought judicial review of a decision by the New South Wales Bar Association to refuse his application for a practising certificate. The dispute centred on whether Mr Roulstone met the criteria for the grant of a practising certificate, particularly in terms of his character and fitness to practise law. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The court was required to determine whether Mr Roulstone was of good fame and character, as required by the Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW). Additionally, it had to assess whether Mr Roulstone had breached an undertaking given to the court and an order made by the court that prohibited him from communicating with former clients. The evidence provided by the Bar Association relied on two instances of communication, which the Association claimed were in breach of the undertaking and the court's order.

The court found that the evidence did not establish any breach by Mr Roulstone of either the undertaking or the court's order. The court was not satisfied that the evidence demonstrated any communication with former clients that was in breach of the conditions set by the court. Consequently, the deemed refusal of Mr Roulstone’s application for a practising certificate was set aside, and the court ordered that the Bar Association grant Mr Roulstone a practising certificate for the year ending 30 June 2016. The court also noted that while Mr Roulstone's responses to the Notice seeking information were incomplete, they were not wilfully misleading or false.