Tangsilsat v Council of the Law Society of New South Wales
Case
•
[2019] NSWCA 144
•19 June 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Tangsilsat v Council of the Law Society of New South Wales [2019] NSWCA 144
[2019] NSWCA 144
19 June 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales by Ms Tangsilsat against a decision of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT). The dispute arose from disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Council of the Law Society of New South Wales, concerning Ms Tangsilsat's failure to disclose her suspension by the Migration Agents Registration Authority (MARA) from practising as a migration agent to the Law Society.
The Court was required to determine whether NCAT had erred in finding that Ms Tangsilsat's non-disclosure constituted professional misconduct under s 297 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW). Further, the appeal raised questions as to whether certain statements made by a member of NCAT during the hearing gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias, and whether Ms Tangsilsat had been denied procedural fairness in relation to NCAT's consideration of the MARA finding.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding NCAT's finding of professional misconduct. The Court reasoned that the failure to disclose the MARA suspension was a material omission that undermined the integrity of the regulatory process. Regarding the apprehension of bias, the Court found that while a member of NCAT had expressed a "hope" as to future investigations by the Law Society, this statement, viewed in context, did not demonstrate actual bias or a reasonable apprehension of bias. The Court also found no denial of procedural fairness. Consequently, the Court discharged the previous stay on proceedings and ordered Ms Tangsilsat to pay the respondent's costs.
The Court was required to determine whether NCAT had erred in finding that Ms Tangsilsat's non-disclosure constituted professional misconduct under s 297 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW). Further, the appeal raised questions as to whether certain statements made by a member of NCAT during the hearing gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias, and whether Ms Tangsilsat had been denied procedural fairness in relation to NCAT's consideration of the MARA finding.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding NCAT's finding of professional misconduct. The Court reasoned that the failure to disclose the MARA suspension was a material omission that undermined the integrity of the regulatory process. Regarding the apprehension of bias, the Court found that while a member of NCAT had expressed a "hope" as to future investigations by the Law Society, this statement, viewed in context, did not demonstrate actual bias or a reasonable apprehension of bias. The Court also found no denial of procedural fairness. Consequently, the Court discharged the previous stay on proceedings and ordered Ms Tangsilsat to pay the respondent's costs.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Judicial Review
-
Natural Justice
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Costs
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Legal Profession Board of Tasmania v W [2023] TASFC 1
Cases Citing This Decision
3
Health Care Complaints Commission v Robinson
[2022] NSWCA 164
Livers v Legal Services Commissioner
[2020] NSWCA 317
Legal Profession Board of Tasmania v W
[2023] TASFC 1
Cases Cited
17
Statutory Material Cited
4
Isbester v Knox City Council
[2015] HCA 20
Stollery v Greyhound Racing Control Board
[1972] HCA 53
Johnson v Johnson
[2000] HCA 48