Legal Services Commissioner v Bridges [2014] NSWCATOD 89

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Legal Services Commissioner v Bridges [2014] NSWCATOD 89 Decision date: 08 August 2014 Jurisdiction: Occupational Division Before: Hon G Mullane, Senior Member S Hale, Senior Member J Butlin, General Member Decision: 1). By consent the Respondent is guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct in relation to Ground 1. 2). By consent the Respondent is guilty of professional misconduct in relation to Ground 2. 3). By consent the Respondent is reprimanded. 4). By consent the Respondent is to pay the Applicant's costs of the proceedings as agreed or as assessed. 5). Any Practising Certificate issued to the Respondent must include a condition that he must not practice as a principal of a law practice and if he does practice, he must practice only as an employee of a law practice. Catchwords: Solicitor - False evidence to court denying prior finding of professional misconduct and overstating period of practice as a lawyer. Legislation Cited: Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Legal Services Commissioner (Applicant) Bryce Dalgety Bridges (Respondent) Representation: L Muston (Applicant) B Bridges (Respondent in person) File Number(s): 1320027

reasons for decision

INTRODUCTION 1The Respondent was a practising legal practitioner until he was struck off the Roll of Legal Practitioners in 1983 by a decision of the Solicitors' Statutory Committee. He appealed that decision to the Court of Appeal and the Court of Appeal ordered that he be struck from the Roll on 9 September 1983. The findings of the Court of Appeal in support of the striking off were of professional misconduct involving dishonesty. 2In 1996 he applied and was re-admitted to the Roll. 3On 22 June 2010 the Respondent gave sworn evidence as a witness in criminal proceedings against Robert Steele in the Local Court in the Downing Centre. 4In his sworn evidence the Respondent testified that he had been a legal practitioner for 46 years. Subsequently, when it was put to him that he was struck off in 1983 for professional misconduct, he testified that he was not struck off for professional misconduct and also that "It was not for dishonesty". When the Magistrate interrupted him and asked "But the finding was professional misconduct, was it?", he replied "It was political - I don't know what it was". 5He then later said, "I have never had any allegation against me of dishonesty". Subsequently the Defendant , Mr Steele, said "... he had full knowledge and he subverted his responsibilities and he deceived the Law Institute for some years about the matter. Is that true Mr Bridges?" The Respondent replied, "Those extracts are probably true. I forget it. I tried to put that behind me." 6The Applicant filed an Application on 29 November 2013 seeking a finding that the false evidence given by the Respondent on oath in the District Court amounted to professional misconduct and seeking an order that his name be removed from the Roll of Local Lawyers. Ground 1 related to his false evidence that he had been practising as a solicitor for 46 years and Ground 2 related to his false denial that his striking off was for professional misconduct and it involved dishonesty. 7The Respondent opposed the Application and on 20 January 2014 the parties filed an Instrument of Consent proposing the following Orders: (1)The Respondent is guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct in relation to Ground 1. (2)The Respondent is guilty of professional misconduct in relation to Ground 2. (3)The Respondent is reprimanded. (4)The Respondent is to pay the Applicant's costs of the proceedings as agreed or assessed.