Gridiger v Council of the Law Society of NSW [1999] NSWSC 904

New South Wales Supreme Court CITATION : Gridiger v Council of the Law Society of NSW [1999] NSWSC 904 CURRENT JURISDICTION : Common Law FILE NUMBER(S) : 12871/98 HEARING DATE(S) : 26 August 1999 JUDGMENT DATE : 8 September 1999

Roland Errol Gridiger (Plaintiff)

PARTIES : The Council of the Law Society of New South Wales (First Defendant)

The Law Society of New South Wales (Second Defendant) JUDGMENT OF : Master Harrison

Mr P R Garling SC with Ms E A Collins (Plaintiffs) COUNSEL : Mr John Griffiths (Defendants) Ms Rosemary MacDougal Eakin McCaffery Cox SOLICITORS : (Plaintiff)

Mr Louis Pierotti Law Society of New South Wales CATCHWORDS : Set aside notice pursuant to s 152 - LPA 1987 ACTS CITED : Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW (as amended) Touzell v Cawthorn (NSWSC unreported 6 October 1995) CASES CITED : Veghelyi v The Law Society of New South Wales (NSWCA, unreported 6 October 1995) Minister for Natural Resources v New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council & Anor (1987) 9 NSWLR 154 DECISION : See para 33

21

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

MASTER HARRISON

WEDNESDAY, 8 SEPTEMBER 1999

12871/98 - ROLAND ERROL GRIDIGER v THE COUNCIL OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF NEW SOUTH WALES & ANOR

JUDGMENT (Set aside notice pursuant to s 152 of the) Legal Profession Act 1987) 1 MASTER: The plaintiff by summons filed 24 November 1998 seeks a declaration that the notice issued by the defendants to the plaintiff under s 152 of the Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) (as amended) is invalid. Alternatively the plaintiff seeks a declaration that the notice constitutes an abuse of process; a declaration that the plaintiff has a reasonable excuse for failing to comply with the notice and a declaration that the notice is invalid to the extent that it requires the plaintiff to produce documents or provide information which are subject to client legal privilege or which are otherwise confidential. 2 The second defendant filed a notice of motion returnable instanter seeking that it be removed as a party to the proceedings. This order was opposed by the plaintiff. The plaintiff relied on the affidavit of Rosemary MacDougal sworn 23 November 1998. The defendants did not rely upon any affidavit evidence. 3 For the purposes of this application I find the following facts.