In the matter of The New South Wales Bar Association [2014] NSWSC 1695

In the matter of The New South Wales Bar Association [2014] NSWSC 1695

The 5.00pm deadline for applications for appointment as senior counsel, and its strict application, were valid, not ultra vires, not a rule or guideline prohibited by Legal Profession Act 2004, s 81(2), did not constitute an unreasonable restraint of trade, nor were oppressive, unfairly prejudicial or unfairly discriminatory within Corporations Act 2001, s 232. The President's decision not to extend the deadline was reasonable, and the Bar Council was under no obligation to review or intervene. Section 1322(4)(d) was not available, as an application for silk is not an act 'in relation to a corporation'. All grounds of the plaintiff failed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Principal Judgment / Final Judgment
Outcome
Proceedings dismissed, with costs
Legal Topics
['lawyers Barristers Senior Counsel Appointments' 'internal Management of Associations' 'jurisdiction of Courts Over Associations' 'restraint of Trade' 'oppression in Corporations' 'time Extension Under Corporations Act']
['professions and Trades' 'associations and Clubs' 'corporations' 'trade and Commerce'] ['lawyers Barristers Senior Counsel Appointments' 'internal Management of Associations' 'jurisdiction of Courts Over Associations' 'restraint of Trade' 'oppression in Corporations' 'time Extension Under Corporations Act']

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

Principal Judgment / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the 5.00pm deadline for applications for appointment as senior counsel was valid and enforceable' "Whether the deadline or the President's refusal to accept a late application was oppressive under Corporations Act 2001, s 232" 'Whether the deadline or related decisions constituted an unreasonable restraint of trade' "Whether the President or Bar Council failed to act consistently with the Association's constitution or objects" 'Whether the Court should extend time under Corporations Act, s 1322(4)(d)']

Ratio Decidendi

The 5.00pm deadline for applications for appointment as senior counsel, and its strict application, were valid, not ultra vires, not a rule or guideline prohibited by Legal Profession Act 2004, s 81(2), did not constitute an unreasonable restraint of trade, nor were oppressive, unfairly prejudicial or unfairly discriminatory within Corporations Act 2001, s 232. The President's decision not to extend the deadline was reasonable, and the Bar Council was under no obligation to review or intervene. Section 1322(4)(d) was not available, as an application for silk is not an act 'in relation to a corporation'. All grounds of the plaintiff failed.

Court Disposition

Proceedings dismissed, with costs

Orders

  • ['Proceedings dismissed, with costs']