[Home]
[Databases]
[WorldLII]
[Search]
[Feedback]
Supreme Court of Victoria |
Last Updated: 30 May 2001
SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA |
Send for Reporting |
PRACTICE COURT |
Not Restricted |
No. 5452 of 2001
NICHOLAS STYANT-BROWNE AND ANOTHER |
Plaintiffs |
|
|
v. |
|
|
|
THE LEGAL OMBUDSMAN AND ANOTHER |
Defendants |
|
|
JUDGE: |
BEACH, J. | |
WHERE HELD: |
MELBOURNE | |
DATE OF HEARING: |
9 MAY 2001 | |
DATE OF JUDGMENT: |
29 MAY 2001 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: |
STYANT-BROWNE & ANOR. v. THE LEGAL OMBUDSMAN & ANOR. | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: |
|
APPEARANCES: |
Counsel |
Solicitors |
For the Plaintiffs |
Mr. D. Collins |
Slater & Gordon |
For the First Defendant |
Mr. G. Nettle Q.C. and Mr. C. Horan |
Aitken Walker & Strachan |
HIS HONOUR:
"151. What happens after an investigation is completed? (1) After completing an investigation under this Division, the Legal Ombudsman, an RPA or the Board must deal with the matter in accordance with this section. (2) The Legal Ombudsman, an RPA or the Board must bring a charge in the Tribunal against the legal practitioner or firm the subject of the investigation if satisfied that there is a reasonable likelihood that the Tribunal would find the practitioner or firm guilty of misconduct. (3) If the Legal Ombudsman, an RPA or the Board is satisfied that there is a reasonable likelihood that the Tribunal would find the legal practitioner or firm guilty of unsatisfactory conduct, the Legal Ombudsman, RPA or Board may - (a) bring a charge in the Tribunal against the practitioner or firm; or (b) with the consent of the practitioner or firm, reprimand or caution the practitioner or firm; or (c) take no further action against the practitioner or firm if satisfied that - (i) the practitioner or firm is generally competent and diligent; and (ii) there has been no substantiated complaint (other than the complaint that led to the investigation) about the conduct of the practitioner or firm within the last 5 years. (4) If the investigation arose from a complaint under which the complainant requested a compensation order, the Legal Ombudsman, an RPA or the Board may require the legal practitioner or firm to pay compensation to the complainant as a condition of deciding under sub-section (3) not to bring a charge against the practitioner or firm. (5) If the Legal Ombudsman, an RPA or the Board is satisfied that there is no reasonable likelihood that the Tribunal would find the legal practitioner or firm guilty of misconduct or unsatisfactory conduct, the Legal Ombudsman, RPA or Board must take no further action against the legal practitioner or firm."
"152. Notice of decision (1) If an investigation arose from a complaint - (a) in the case of a Legal Ombudsman investigation, the Legal Ombudsman - (i) must give the complainant and the RPA of which the legal practitioner or firm investigated is a regulated practitioner (or the Board, if the practitioner or firm is a regulated practitioner of the Board) written notice of his or her decision under section 151 as soon as practicable after making it, including the reasons for the decisions; and (ii) if the decision is to take no further action against the practitioner or firm, must dismiss the complaint."
"Prove the truth of (a charge, statement, claim etc.); give good grounds for."
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2001/164.html