NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Legal Services Commissioner v Paul [2017] NSWCATOD 86 Hearing dates: 26 May 2017 Date of orders: 26 May 2017 Decision date: 31 May 2017 Jurisdiction: Occupational Division Before: Boland ADCJ, Deputy President N S Isenberg, Senior Member E Hayes, General Member Decision: The Tribunal noting the respondent's concession that she is guilty of professional misconduct orders that: 1. By consent the respondent's name be removed from the roll of local practitioners. 2. By consent the respondent is to pay the costs of the applicant as agreed, and failing agreement as assessed. 3. Pursuant to s 64(1) (a) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) publication by any person or entity of the name of the person set out in paragraph 1.2 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and elsewhere in the Exhibits before the Tribunal is prohibited. Catchwords: PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – Where practitioner concedes conduct that amounts to professional misconduct – where parties have executed an Instrument of Consent proposing orders that the practitioner's name be removed from the local roll - where non publication order is made in respect of witness named in Exhibits before Tribunal. Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW) (repealed) Legal Profession Uniform Law 2014 Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (NSW) Cases Cited: Allinson v General Council of Medical Education and Registration (1984) 1 KB 750 Council of the Law Society of New South Wales v CZD [2017] NSWCATOD 31 Frugtniet v Board of Examiners [2005] VSC 332 Griffin v The Council of the Law Society of New South Wales [2016] NSWCA 364 Kennedy v The Council of the Incorporated Law Institute of NSW (1939) 13 ALR 56 Prothonotary v Gregory [2017] NSWCA 101 Ziems v The Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of NSW (1957) 97 CLR 279; [1957] HCA 46 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Legal Services Commissioner (Applicant) Nicole Anthea Paul (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: S Odgers SC (Applicant) SJ Stanton (Respondent)
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