PROTHONOTARY OF THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES v CHARLES FILGATE GILES [1988] NSWCA 117
The removal from the ACT roll, the facts established in those proceedings, and the respondent's admission justified removal from the NSW roll despite pending ACT restoration proceedings; the NSW Court's standards and evidence of future fitness govern any restoration application.
- Parties
- Claimant: Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of New South Wales; Respondent: Charles Filgate Giles
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 25 June 1988
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Removal From Roll / Application for Order; Judgment
- Outcome
- Name removed from roll; costs to prothonotary
- 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
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Removal From Roll / Application for Order; Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Charles Filgate Giles should be removed from the roll of solicitors in New South Wales
- 2 Whether proceedings in ACT to restore his name should delay NSW removal
Ratio Decidendi
The removal from the ACT roll, the facts established in those proceedings, and the respondent's admission justified removal from the NSW roll despite pending ACT restoration proceedings; the NSW Court's standards and evidence of future fitness govern any restoration application.
Court Disposition
Name removed from roll; costs to prothonotary
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