PROTHONOTARY OF THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES v CHARLES FILGATE GILES [1988] NSWCA 118
Having regard to the evidence and admissions in the ACT proceedings, Charles Filgate Giles's name should be removed from the roll of solicitors in NSW. The public interest and standards of the legal profession require removal.
- Parties
- Claimant: Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of New South Wales; Opponent: Charles Filgate Giles
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 25 June 1988
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Removal From Roll / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Name of Charles Filgate Giles removed from roll of solicitors; costs to be paid by Giles.
- Legal Topics
- Removal From Roll, Restoration to Roll, Professional Misconduct
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Claimant
Charles Filgate Giles
Opponent
Procedural Posture
Application for Removal From Roll / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Court should remove Charles Filgate Giles from the roll of solicitors of the Supreme Court of New South Wales
- 2 Whether the proceedings should be delayed pending resolution of an application for restoration of the name in the Australian Capital Territory
Ratio Decidendi
Having regard to the evidence and admissions in the ACT proceedings, Charles Filgate Giles's name should be removed from the roll of solicitors in NSW. The public interest and standards of the legal profession require removal.
Court Disposition
Name of Charles Filgate Giles removed from roll of solicitors; costs to be paid by Giles.
Orders
- That the name of Charles Filgate Giles be removed from the roll of solicitors of the Court.
- That the costs of the prothonotary of and incidental to the proceedings before the Court be paid by the said Charles Filgate Giles.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment