Makowski v Legal Profession Admission Board [2019] NSWSC 921

Makowski v Legal Profession Admission Board [2019] NSWSC 921

Interim relief was refused because, even if the plaintiff succeeded in setting aside the Examinations Committee decision, that would not itself give him access to Canvas or permission to sit Equity and Commercial Transactions; the Court had no jurisdiction under s 69 to relax the progression rule; the plaintiff had not pursued available review by the LPAB itself; and access to Canvas was tied to enrolment or pending enrolment rather than a freestanding entitlement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law Proceeding Seeking Orders in the Nature of Certiorari and Interim Relief / Notice of Motion for Interim Relief Filed on 8 July 2019
Outcome
The plaintiff's notice of motion for interim relief was dismissed, with costs to the first defendant.
Legal Topics
['interim Relief' 'progression Rule' 'merits Review' 'access to Canvas' 'relaxation of NSW Admission Board Rules 2015']
['administrative Law' 'legal Profession Admission' 'judicial Review'] ['interim Relief' 'progression Rule' 'merits Review' 'access to Canvas' 'relaxation of NSW Admission Board Rules 2015']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Administrative Law Proceeding Seeking Orders in the Nature of Certiorari and Interim Relief / Notice of Motion for Interim Relief Filed on 8 July 2019

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether interim relief should be granted to permit the plaintiff to access Canvas pending determination of the proceedings.' 'Whether there was utility in granting interim relief where the plaintiff had not obtained or pursued a decision by the LPAB itself relaxing the progression rule.' 'Whether the Court could order relaxation of the progression rule under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

Interim relief was refused because, even if the plaintiff succeeded in setting aside the Examinations Committee decision, that would not itself give him access to Canvas or permission to sit Equity and Commercial Transactions; the Court had no jurisdiction under s 69 to relax the progression rule; the plaintiff had not pursued available review by the LPAB itself; and access to Canvas was tied to enrolment or pending enrolment rather than a freestanding entitlement.

Court Disposition

The plaintiff's notice of motion for interim relief was dismissed, with costs to the first defendant.

Orders

  • ["Dismiss the plaintiff's notice of motion filed on 8 July 2019." "Order the plaintiff to pay the first defendant's costs of the notice of motion."]