Commissioner for Fair Trading v Aird [2005] NSWADT 204

Commissioner for Fair Trading v Aird [2005] NSWADT 204

The Tribunal found that the respondent, Mr Aird, was not conducting a conveyancing business within the meaning of the Act, did not receive or exercise control over the client funds in question, and was therefore not personally subject to the obligations of s 25. Consequently, he was not guilty of professional misconduct as alleged.

Parties
Applicant: Commissioner for Fair Trading; Respondent: Stuart Gordon Aird
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 August 2005
Procedural Posture
Professional Misconduct / Principal Matter
Outcome
Information dismissed and costs ordered in favour of the respondent.
Legal Topics
Retaining Lien, Trust Money, Obligations of Conveyancers
Professional Discipline Conveyancing Law Retaining Lien Trust Money Obligations of Conveyancers

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioner for Fair Trading

Applicant

Stuart Gordon Aird

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Professional Misconduct / Principal Matter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent, as a licensed conveyancer, conducted a conveyancing business so as to be personally obligated under s 25(1) of the Conveyancers Licensing Act 1995
  2. 2 Whether the respondent received money on behalf of clients and failed to pay it into a general trust account
  3. 3 Whether the respondent claimed a general retaining lien over client funds when not entitled

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the respondent, Mr Aird, was not conducting a conveyancing business within the meaning of the Act, did not receive or exercise control over the client funds in question, and was therefore not personally subject to the obligations of s 25. Consequently, he was not guilty of professional misconduct as alleged.

Court Disposition

Information dismissed and costs ordered in favour of the respondent.

Orders

  • That the information be dismissed.
  • That the cost of the Conveyancer, as agreed or assessed, be paid from the Statutory Interest Account.