Stanoevski v The Council of the Law Society of New South Wales

The Supreme Court of New South Wales heard an appeal by Mr. Stanoevski against a decision of the Appeal Panel of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal. The Appeal Panel had ordered that Mr. Stanoevski's name be removed from the roll of solicitors. The proceedings before the Tribunal had commenced under the *Legal Profession Act 1987* (NSW), and the Appeal Panel's decision was made in accordance with the provisions of that Act, as preserved by Schedule 9, clause 15 of the *Legal Profession Act 2004* (NSW).

The central legal issues before the Supreme Court were whether the Appeal Panel had erred in law in its determination of Mr. Stanoevski's fitness to remain on the roll of solicitors. Specifically, the court was asked to consider whether the Appeal Panel applied the correct legal test for removal from the roll, whether it had misapprehended the nature of its task, and whether there was a relevant distinction between fitness to be on the roll and fitness to hold a practising certificate. Further questions arose concerning whether the Appeal Panel had misapprehended the onus of proof, taken irrelevant matters into account, made erroneous findings of fact, or exercised its discretion outside permissible legal bounds.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. It held that the Appeal Panel had correctly applied the established legal test for removal from the roll, which requires a determination of whether a solicitor is a "fit and proper person" to remain on the roll. The court found no error in the Appeal Panel's approach to the onus of proof, distinguishing between the burden of establishing a case and the burden of adducing evidence, particularly in relation to proving a negative proposition. The court concluded that the Appeal Panel had not misapprehended its task, had not taken irrelevant matters into account, and had not made erroneous findings of fact or exercised its discretion unlawfully. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs.