IN THE MATTER of the application of NOEL NORMAN DENNIS to be restored to the ROLL OF SOLICITORS and IN THE MATTER of the LEGAL PRACTITIONERS' ACT. MOTION FOR READMISSION. [1988] NSWCA 37

IN THE MATTER of the application of NOEL NORMAN DENNIS to be restored to the ROLL OF SOLICITORS and IN THE MATTER of the LEGAL PRACTITIONERS' ACT

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

SAMUELS, MAHONEY and Hope JJA 5, 6 and 7 September 1988, 23 December 1988 [1988] NSWCA 37

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS — discussion of principles governing application for restoration to the roll of solicitors by a former solicitor struck off for professional misconduct.

ORDERS Motion is dismissed — applicant must pay Law Society's costs of the application.

Samuels JA MOTION FOR READMISSION

This is an application by a former solicitor, who was struck off for professional misconduct in July 1981, to be restored to the roll of solicitors. The principles of law which are to be applied are not in doubt. The applicant bears the onus - which is a heavy one - of satisfying the Court that he should be readmitted, and in order to do so he must displace the decision as to probable permanent unfitness which was the basis of his removal: Ex parte Munro, Re Legal Practitioners' Act (1969) 71 SR 448 at 454; Kotowicz v Law Society of New South Wales (No 2) (Court of Appeal - 7 August 1987, unreported) per Kirby P at 19 and 20 and per Samuels JA at 3; Ex parte Lenehan (1949) 77 CLR 403 at 422. In reaching its decision the Court should act with the greatest caution and only on solid and substantial grounds, and must depend upon its own assessment of the applicant's character, uprightness, honour and trustworthiness: Incorporated Law Institute of New South Wales v Meagher (1909) 9 CLR 655 at 664 and 692; Lenehan at 422. It is, of course, equally well established that in discharging its responsibility to supervise the discipline of solicitors, the Court is not exercising a punitive but a protective role, having primary regard to the protection of the public interest and of the interests of the profession: Clyne V New South Wales Bar Association (1960) 104 CLR 186 at 201-2 and New South Wales Bar Association v Evatt (1968) 117 CLR 177 at 183.