NSW Caselaw
THE PROTHONOTARY OF THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES v LEAK
SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL
KIRBY P 27 June 1988, 27 June 1988 [1988] NSWCA 121
KEY WORDS: LEGAL PRACTITIONERS — PRACTICE — CONSENT LEGAL PRACTITIONERS — solicitors — removal from Roll — removal from Roll of Practitioners under Legal Practitioners Act 1981 (SA) for trust account and other offences — application by Prothonotary — hearing before single Judge of Appeal — whether order properly made by consent under Supreme Court Act 1970, s46 — held: (1) On the evidence, the opponent consented to the order; (2) order for removal from Roll of Solicitors made. PRACTICE — order by consent. WORDS & PHRASES — consent Supreme Court Act 1970, s46. Legal Practitioners Act 1981 (SA). ORDER That the name of Ronald Douglas Leak be removed from the Roll of Solicitors.
Kirby P I am dealing with these proceedings pursuant to s46 of the Supreme Court Act 1970. That section, relevantly, authorizes me to exercise the powers of the Court of Appeal to direct the entry of any judgment by consent or to make any order by consent which may be made by the Court.
The Prothonotary of the Supreme Court has moved the Court for an order that the name of Ronald Douglas Leak be removed from the Roll of Solicitors of the Court and that he be ordered to pay the costs of and incidental to the proceedings.
The summons first came before the Court constituted by Priestley, Clarke JIA and myself on 9 May 1988. The basis of the summons is an order which is annexed to the affidavit of the Prothonotary made by the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia (King CJ, Legoe and Cox JJ) on 2 April 1984. This ordered that the opponent's name be removed from the Roll of Practitioners of that State.
The opponent's name was admitted to the Roll of Solicitors of this State on 12 February 1971. It has remained there since that date. However, it appears that the opponent has practised as a solicitor in South Australia.
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