BAR ASSOCIATION OF NEW SOUTH WALES v T [2001] NSWCA 316

BAR ASSOCIATION OF NEW SOUTH WALES v T [2001] NSWCA 316

The Administrative Decisions Tribunal has jurisdiction because, although the complaint had been referred to the LPDT before 1 July 1994, it had not, by that date, become the subject of proceedings before the Tribunal—that is, the Tribunal had not been constituted to hear it—and hence, per cl 30(2) of the Legal Profession Regulation 1994, it is to be dealt with under the new scheme, conferring jurisdiction on the ADT.

Parties
Claimant: Bar Association of New South Wales; Opponent: T
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Case Stated/referral From Administrative Decisions Tribunal
Outcome
Declaration granted
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Administrative Decisions Tribunal, Transitional Provisions, Interpretation of Legal Profession Regulation 1994
Administrative Law Legal Profession Jurisdiction of Administrative Decisions Tribunal Transitional Provisions Interpretation of Legal Profession Regulation 1994

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bar Association of New South Wales

Claimant

T

Opponent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Case Stated/referral From Administrative Decisions Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Administrative Decisions Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear and determine Complaint No 6 of 1993 filed against the defendant barrister
  2. 2 Interpretation of clauses 30(2) and 31(1) of the Legal Profession Regulation 1994 in relation to complaints filed but not heard prior to legislative amendments

Ratio Decidendi

The Administrative Decisions Tribunal has jurisdiction because, although the complaint had been referred to the LPDT before 1 July 1994, it had not, by that date, become the subject of proceedings before the Tribunal—that is, the Tribunal had not been constituted to hear it—and hence, per cl 30(2) of the Legal Profession Regulation 1994, it is to be dealt with under the new scheme, conferring jurisdiction on the ADT.

Court Disposition

Declaration granted

Orders

  • A declaration that the Administrative Decisions Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear and determine the complaint being Complaint No 6 of 1993 filed by the plaintiff against the defendant in the Legal Profession Disciplinary Tribunal on 17 March 1993.
  • No order as to costs.