High Court of Australia
High Court of Australia Barwick C.J. Gibbs, Stephen, Mason and Aickin JJ. Weaver v Law Society (NSW) [1979] HCA 35
ORDER Appeal dismissed with costs.
Cur. adv. vult.
The following written judgments were delivered:—
Aug. 8 Barwick C.J.
I have had the advantage of reading the reasons prepared by my brother Mason for dismissing this appeal. I agree with them and do not desire to add anything on my own behalf.
Gibbs J.
I agree with the reasons prepared by Mason J.
Stephen J.
I agree with the reasons stated by Mason J. for the dismissal of this appeal.
Mason J.
This was an appeal by a solicitor by way of special leave against a declaration and order of the Court of Appeal whereby it was declared that the appellant had been guilty of professional misconduct and it was ordered that the appellant's name be removed from the roll of solicitors. This Court, having heard argument in support of the appeal, excluded from the grant of special leave a proposed challenge by the appellant to the penalty imposed upon him by the Court of Appeal on the ground of severity and otherwise dismissed the appeal, announcing that the reasons for the decision would be published later.
The facts are summarized in the judgment of Street C.J. It appears that on a reference pursuant to s. 76 of the Legal Practitioners Act, 1898 N.S.W. ("the Act") the Statutory Committee found that the appellant had failed to comply with the requirements of the Act and the regulations made thereunder respecting the handling of trust moneys and solicitors' trust accounts. However, the Committee found that the failure was not wilful and that for this reason he had not been guilty of disgraceful or dishonourable conduct and that he had not been guilty of professional misconduct. In reaching this conclusion the Statutory Committee accepted the appellant's evidence that it was not until May 1970, the month when the respondent appointed a receiver of the partnership, that he knew of the irregularities in the firm's trust account and the handling of the trust moneys which it held. The transaction giving rise to the irregularities were handled by Knowles, his partner, who freely admitted his responsibility for what had occurred.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate