Nikolaidis v Legal Services Commissioner and Anor [2007] NSWSC 1491
The interests of justice favoured granting a stay because the stay would operate for a comparatively brief period pending an appeal with reasonable prospects of success; the plaintiff had practised without apparent risk to the public between 2000 and sentencing; without a practising certificate s 17 of the Legal Profession Act 2004 created a real risk that Mr Zwar could not run the firm and a likelihood of prejudice to clients; and the plaintiff's undertakings restricting his practice, requiring disclosure of his conviction, and requiring compliance with reasonable directions adequately protected the public. The plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendants' costs because their conduct in...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 21 December 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Application by Solicitor for Stay of Cancellation and Suspension of Practising Certificate / Urgent Interlocutory Application Pending Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal
- Outcome
- Stay granted on undertakings to be given by the legal practitioner; plaintiff ordered to pay the defendants' costs of the application.
- Legal Topics
- ['cancellation and Suspension of Practising Certificate' 'stay Pending Appeal' 'protection of the Public' 'fitness to Practise' 'undertakings by Legal Practitioner']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application by Solicitor for Stay of Cancellation and Suspension of Practising Certificate / Urgent Interlocutory Application Pending Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the cancellation and suspension of the plaintiff's practising certificate should be stayed pending determination of his appeal against conviction." 'Whether the public would be adequately protected if a stay were granted on conditions.' 'Whether refusal of a stay would risk serious prejudice to the plaintiff, the firm and its clients, and undermine the utility of the appeal.' 'What costs order should be made on the stay application.']
Ratio Decidendi
The interests of justice favoured granting a stay because the stay would operate for a comparatively brief period pending an appeal with reasonable prospects of success; the plaintiff had practised without apparent risk to the public between 2000 and sentencing; without a practising certificate s 17 of the Legal Profession Act 2004 created a real risk that Mr Zwar could not run the firm and a likelihood of prejudice to clients; and the plaintiff's undertakings restricting his practice, requiring disclosure of his conviction, and requiring compliance with reasonable directions adequately protected the public. The plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendants' costs because their conduct in...
Court Disposition
Stay granted on undertakings to be given by the legal practitioner; plaintiff ordered to pay the defendants' costs of the application.
Orders
- ['Leave granted to the plaintiff to file and serve the Amended Summons by 4 pm on 19 December 2007.' 'The amended Summons was listed for direction on 19 March 2008.' 'The Court noted undertakings by the plaintiff that, until his appeal against conviction is finally decided, lapses or otherwise ends, or until further...
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