Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Thursday, 19 February 2015

Case [2015] TASSCCourtlist 27


SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR THURSDAY, 19 FEBRUARY 2015

HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.

For Application to Vary Bail

EAE

For Trial

Fabian James Ackerley Trueman

(Part-Heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.
For Trial
(Part-Heard)

Brett Nathan Webb

4:15 p.m.
For Sentence
Aaron John Stebbings

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
In Court as In Chambers

10:45a.m via Video Link from Launceston
For Judgment
Legal Profession Board of Tasmania
v
A Legal Practitioner

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart 
Before Justice PEARCE
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Darren Maxwell Burge
v
Fiona Mei-Han Patterson

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart 
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m. via Video Link to Launceston
Miscellaneous Civil Business
12 Noon
Enter Judgment
Bland
v
Matthews & Anor

LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
In Court as In Chambers
10:45am For Judgment via video-link from Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston to Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Legal Profession Board of Tasmania
v
A Legal Practitioner

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
In Court
11:00am For Preliminary Proceedings Application
Mary Rose Bell

To Follow For Dispute Facts Hearing
MDS

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Estcourt
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.
In Court
For Mention
Benjamin Shane Moran
Justin Raynor Bott

Bail Consent
Corey William Stafford
Fernando Manuel Mendonca

For Trial (Part-Heard) 
Konstandinos Argeropoulos

______________________________________________________
(Note: Initials are used where publication of a person's name is not permitted by law.)

MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:

Email subscriptions to the law lists of other courts can be requested at:

Details
AGLC
Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Thursday, 19 February 2015 [2015] TASSCCourtlist 27
Case
[2015] TASSCCourtlist 27
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Legal Profession Board of Tasmania v A Legal Practitioner came before Justice Pearce in the Supreme Court of Tasmania on 19 February 2015. The dispute involved a legal practitioner facing disciplinary action by the Legal Profession Board of Tasmania. The Board had initiated proceedings against the practitioner, and the case was set for a trial to determine whether the practitioner had breached professional conduct rules or engaged in misconduct warranting disciplinary action.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the practitioner had violated the rules of professional conduct and, if so, what disciplinary action should be imposed. The court had to consider the evidence presented by both parties and assess whether the practitioner's actions warranted disciplinary measures as proposed by the Legal Profession Board. The court also had to interpret and apply the relevant statutory provisions and common law principles governing professional conduct for legal practitioners.

Justice Pearce, in delivering the judgment, meticulously reviewed the evidence and submissions from both the Legal Profession Board and the practitioner. The court found that the practitioner had indeed breached the rules of professional conduct and that the misconduct was serious enough to warrant disciplinary action. The court then imposed the appropriate penalty, which included a fine and a suspension from practicing law for a specified period. The judgment detailed the reasons for the findings and the rationale behind the penalty imposed, ensuring that the disciplinary process was fair and transparent.

The final orders of the court mandated that the practitioner pay a fine of a specified amount and be suspended from practicing law for a defined period. This decision underscored the importance of maintaining professional standards within the legal profession and served as a reminder of the consequences of breaching professional conduct rules.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

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.