Ho v Berger [2019] NSWCATOD 128

Ho v Berger [2019] NSWCATOD 128

The respondent's dishonest and unauthorised use of the applicants' deposit money constituted professional misconduct. As this directly caused the applicants loss, and the statutory criteria for compensation and costs were satisfied, the Tribunal made compensation orders in the statutory maximum sums, plus costs, against the respondent.

Parties
First Applicant: Andrew H Ho; Second Applicant: Tessalonica Ho; Respondent: Victor Berger
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Compensation Application Following Disciplinary Proceedings / Final Orders After Hearing and Submissions
Outcome
Compensation and costs orders made in favour of applicants, against respondent
Legal Topics
Solicitor Stakeholder Obligations, Unethical and Fraudulent Conduct, Professional Misconduct, Compensation for Loss Suffered, Special Conditions in Contracts, Costs Orders in Occupational Division
Legal Profession Professional Discipline Compensation Law Solicitor Stakeholder Obligations Unethical and Fraudulent Conduct Professional Misconduct Compensation for Loss Suffered Special Conditions in Contracts +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew H Ho

First Applicant

Tessalonica Ho

Second Applicant

Victor Berger

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Compensation Application Following Disciplinary Proceedings / Final Orders After Hearing and Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondent's conduct constituted professional misconduct and was causative of loss to the applicants
  2. 2 Whether the tribunal should make orders for compensation and costs against the respondent

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's dishonest and unauthorised use of the applicants' deposit money constituted professional misconduct. As this directly caused the applicants loss, and the statutory criteria for compensation and costs were satisfied, the Tribunal made compensation orders in the statutory maximum sums, plus costs, against the respondent.

Court Disposition

Compensation and costs orders made in favour of applicants, against respondent

Orders

  • The Applicants are to file and serve a list of expenses incurred within 14 Days.
  • The Respondent is to file and serve any objections within 7 days of receipt of the list.