FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Schnur & Urbina [2024] FedCFamC1F 374
File number(s): MLC 13501 of 2020 Judgment of: JOHNS J Date of judgment: 31 May 2024 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – referral to the Legal Services Commissioner – where the parenting matter was listed for an eight day final hearing – where the mother’s counsel advised the court at a mention hearing he would appear at trial – where the mother’s counsel appeared on the first day of the final hearing having not read a substantial number of the documents with which he was briefed – where the mother’s counsel failed to appear at subsequent mention hearings – where the mother’s counsel accepted a brief in another court, listed at the same time as the final hearing – where the mother’s counsel had not signed the High Court Register of Practitioners – where the final hearing was unable to proceed Legislation: Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 s 57
Judiciary Act 1903 s 55B(3)
Legal Profession Uniform Conduct (Barristers) Rules 2015 r 57, 104
Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 28 Date of hearing: 7 May 2024 Place: Melbourne Counsel for the Applicant: Ms Morkos Solicitor for the Applicant: Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Counsel for the Respondent: Mr B Solicitor for the Respondent: Rodriquez Family Lawyers Counsel for the Independent Children's Lawyer: Ms Hutchings Solicitor for the Independent Children's Lawyer: Perisic Lawyers ORDERS
MLC 13501 of 2020 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MR SCHNUR
Applicant
AND: MS URBINA
Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER
ORDER MADE BY:
JOHNS J
DATE OF ORDER:
7 MAY 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The National Judicial Registrar of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1) is requested to do all such acts as may be required to refer this matter to the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner (“OLSC”) for investigation with respect to the professional conduct of Mr B of Counsel in relation to his conduct in these proceedings, and in particular with respect to:-
(a)Whether Mr B has signed the High Court Register of Practitioners (as required by s.55B(3) of the Judiciary Act 1903 and s.57 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021);
(b)Whether Mr B has breached his professional obligations under the Legal Profession Uniform Conduct (Barristers) Rules 2015 including but not limited to Rules 11, 57, 58, 104 ad 111 arising from:-
(i)Mr B’s apparent failure to read documents with which he was briefed;
(ii)Mr B’s apparent acceptance of a brief to appear in another Court (Magistrates’ Court of Victoria), notwithstanding his obligation to appear on behalf of his client in this Court on the first day of hearing (29 April 2024);
(iii)Mr B’s failure to appear when the matter was called on at 3.45pm on 29 April 2024 and this day;
and for that purpose cause the following documents to be provided…
Continue reading Schnur & Urbina
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Schnur & Urbina [2024] FedCFamC1F 374
- Case
- [2024] FedCFamC1F 374
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether Mr B's conduct warranted a referral to the Legal Services Commissioner for investigation. Specifically, the court needed to consider whether Mr B had signed the High Court Register of Practitioners, as required by statute, and whether he had breached his professional obligations under the Legal Profession Uniform Conduct (Barristers) Rules 2015. The rules in question included obligations to read briefed documents, to honour commitments to clients, and to maintain professional standards.
The court found that Mr B's conduct did warrant a referral to the Legal Services Commissioner. The court noted that Mr B had not signed the High Court Register of Practitioners and had failed to read briefed documents. Furthermore, Mr B had accepted a brief in another court while still obligated to appear in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The court concluded that these actions were serious breaches of professional conduct. The court requested the National Judicial Registrar to refer the matter to the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner and ordered that relevant documents be provided to the Commissioner.
The court further ordered that a transcript of the proceedings be obtained and placed on the court file. It directed that the form of the order was subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors or to record a variation to the order. This decision highlighted the importance of adherence to professional obligations and the consequences of failing to do so in family law proceedings.
Orders
Orders of the court
MLC 13501 of 2020
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:
MR SCHNUR
Applicant
AND:
MS URBINA
Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER
ORDER MADE BY:
JOHNS J
DATE OF ORDER:
7 MAY 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The National Judicial Registrar of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1) is requested to do all such acts as may be required to refer this matter to the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner (“OLSC”) for investigation with respect to the professional conduct of Mr B of Counsel in relation to his conduct in these proceedings, and in particular with respect to:-
(a) Whether Mr B has signed the High Court Register of Practitioners (as required by s.55B(3) of the Judiciary Act 1903 and s.57 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021);
(b) Whether Mr B has breached his professional obligations under the Legal Profession Uniform Conduct (Barristers) Rules 2015 including but not limited to Rules 11, 57, 58, 104 ad 111 arising from:-
(i) Mr B’s apparent failure to read documents with which he was briefed;
(ii) Mr B’s apparent acceptance of a brief to appear in another Court (Magistrates’ Court of Victoria), notwithstanding his obligation to appear on behalf of his client in this Court on the first day of hearing (29 April 2024);
(iii) Mr B’s failure to appear when the matter was called on at 3.45pm on 29 April 2024 and this day;
and for that purpose cause the following documents to be provided to the OLSC:-
A. A copy of these orders;
B. Transcripts of proceedings on 16 April, 29 April 2024 and 40 April 2024, and this day;
C. A copy of Exhibit 1, being emails from Mr B (3) dated 6 May 2024.
2. I direct that a transcript of this day be obtained and placed on the Court file,
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.