Australia, July 18 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on June 17:

1. On 9 August 2024 the Tribunal found Patrick Fordham Mack (Practitioner) guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct and professional misconduct. The Tribunal ordered that a further (Stage 2) hearing be conducted in order to determine appropriate protective orders.

2. On 28 and 29 October 2024 the Tribunal heard evidence in the Stage 2 proceedings. The Tribunal reserved its decision, and made directions for the filing of written submissions. For a variety of reasons which assume no present significance, the timetable for filing of written submissions was extended.

3. On 27 November 2024 the Council of the New South Wales Bar Association (Council) filed submissions in support of the relief which it contended was appropriate. The Council urged the Tribunal to find that the Practitioner was not a fit and proper person to remain on the Roll of Australian Lawyers (the Roll), a recommendation that the Practitioner be removed from the Roll pursuant to s 302(1)(f) of the Legal Profession Uniform Law 2015 (NSW) (Uniform Law) and an order that the Practitioner pay the Council's costs of the proceedings.

4. On 10 January 2025 the Practitioner filed written submissions in which he submitted that it was inappropriate to recommend his removal from the Roll, asked the Tribunal to order that he "be supervised for a period as a condition of any practising certificate he is issued", such practising certificate to be on the basis that the Practitioner was an employed solicitor with conditions for supervision of his practice. The Practitioner sought that he be "admonished" by the Tribunal in its published decision. The Practitioner did not oppose an order for costs.

5. On 14 February 2025 the Council responded to the Practitioner's submissions, reiterating its contention that the Practitioner was not a fit and proper person to be on the Roll, and that admonition and the making of a costs order against the Practitioner were factors entitled to little to no weight in the circumstances of this case.

6. On 14 April 2025 the Practitioner informed the Tribunal that he wished to apply to adduce further evidence in the proceedings. On 23 April 2025 the Tribunal informed the Practitioner that, unless he filed his application by 10 May 2025, the Tribunal would publish its decision. On 24 April 2025 the Practitioner informed the Tribunal that he would be unable to meet that deadline as he was travelling overseas with a volunteer aid mission. On 29 April 2025 the Tribunal directed that the Practitioner file any application to adduce further evidence by 21 May 2025. On 17 May 2025 the Practitioner informed the Tribunal that he did not wish to apply to adduce further evidence in the proceedings.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/19775fabadcf9a149e1f8bc8)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.