The Prothonotary Supreme Court of NSW v Darveniza

The Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (the claimant) sought orders for the removal of Mr Darveniza (the opponent) from the Roll of Legal Practitioners for New South Wales. The dispute concerned allegations of misconduct and unfitness arising from criminal offences committed by the opponent. The matter was heard by Sheller and Powell JJA, and Hodgson CJ in Eq.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the opponent was a person of good fame and character, and consequently, whether he was a fit and proper person to remain on the Roll of Legal Practitioners. The court was required to determine the implications of the opponent's criminal convictions for his continued admission to legal practice.

The court reasoned that a conviction for a criminal offence, particularly one involving dishonesty, could demonstrate a lack of good fame and character, and therefore unfitness to practice law. The legal principle applied was that the court has a duty to maintain the integrity of the legal profession and to protect the public. The court found that the opponent's criminal conduct demonstrated a fundamental lack of the probity and trustworthiness required of a legal practitioner.

The court made declarations that the opponent was not a person of good fame and character, and not a fit and proper person to remain on the Roll of Legal Practitioners. Consequently, the court ordered that the name of the opponent be removed from the Roll of Legal Practitioners of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, and that the opponent pay the claimant’s costs.