2.1 This Chapter gives an overview of the system for complaints against lawyers established by Part 10 of the Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW).
MAKING A COMPLAINT
2.2 In New South Wales a complaint against a lawyer must be made to the Legal Services Commissioner (the “LSC”). If a complaint is made to either the Bar Council or the Law Society Council (the “Councils”), it must be forwarded to the LSC.1
2.3 A complaint must:
- be in writing;2
- identify the complainant and the practitioner complained against;3 and
- provide particulars of the conduct complained of.4
2.4 In 1999/2000, 2,901 written complaints were received by the LSC. These included 2,554 complaints about solicitors, 162 against barristers and 13 against licensed conveyancers. In addition to this, 9,089 telephone enquiries were dealt with by legal staff at the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner (OLSC).5
2.5 Complaints must usually be made within three years of the date on which the conduct is alleged to have occurred.6 However, a complaint may be received outside the three year period provided a determination is made that:
2.6 The LSC is responsible for determining whether to accept complaints made to him about conduct which allegedly occurred more than three years earlier. When a complaint about conduct which allegedly occurred more than three years earlier is made by a Council, that Council must determine whether to accept the complaint.8 Determinations as to whether to accept out of time complaints cannot be challenged.9 In 1999/2000, 46 out of a total of 2,901 written complaints received by the LSC were rejected as being out of time.10
2.7 Complaints must be about one or more of the following:
- unsatisfactory professional conduct;11
- professional misconduct;12 and
- a consumer dispute which need not necessarily amount to professional misconduct or unsatisfactory professional conduct.13
2.8 Aspects of complaints that involve unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct may ultimately be dealt with as misconduct matters before the Legal Services Division of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal (the “Tribunal”). Consumer disputes cannot be dealt with by the Tribunal.
Withdrawal of complaints
2.9 Complaints can be withdrawn but only if they are withdrawn in writing.14 Complaints cannot be withdrawn once proceedings have been instituted in the Legal Services Division of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal (the “Tribunal”). The LSC or Council to whom the complaint was referred may reject the withdrawal of the complaint if satisfied that the complaint may involve misconduct. The withdrawal of a complaint does not stop the making of another complaint with respect to the same allegations.
Compensation
2.10 A complainant may request compensation within six years of the misconduct which caused the alleged loss. If the misconduct issue is referred to the Tribunal, the Tribunal must decide what compensation order to make when it has completed its hearing.15 The claim, which must be in writing, may be made at any time before the “disposal of the complaint” but not once proceedings have been instituted in the Tribunal unless the Tribunal grants leave.16
PARTIES TO A COMPLAINT
Complainants
2.11 Any person (including a Council and the LSC) may make a complaint relating to the conduct of a legal practitioner.17
2.12 People who make complaints fall into a wide variety of categories. The greatest number of complaints are lodged by current clients of the legal practitioner complained against. The next largest category is complaints lodged by previous clients followed by those lodged by opposing clients. Other complainants include other legal practitioners (either on their own behalf or on behalf of clients), the LSC, judicial officers, the Law Society, people associated with the administration of a deceased estate and witnesses.
Table 2.1: Chief sources of complaints against legal practitioners, 1999/200018
| Sources of complaints | Solicitors | Barristers | Lic. conv. |
| Current clients | 37% | 23% | 69% |
| Previous clients | 20% | 14% | 0% |
| Opposing clients | 12% | 10% | 0% |
2.13 Of the telephone enquiries received by the OLSC, approximately 71% came from clients of legal practitioners, 8.2% came from a friend or relative of a client and 6.2% from an opposing client.19
Persons complained against
2.14 Complaints can be made about the conduct of solicitors, barristers,20 licensed conveyancers21 and public notaries.22 Judicial officers cannot be the subject of a complaint under Part 10 even in relation to conduct that occurred when they were legal practitioners,23 although it is not clear where acting judges stand in this regard.24 Some legal practitioners cannot currently be the subject of complaints under Part 10 in relation to conduct that took place when they were acting in a number of what could be termed “quasi-judicial” positions. These include:
- arbitrators;25
- commercial arbitrators;26
- mediators;27
- referees;28 and
- costs assessors.29
2.15 There are no, or inadequate, mechanisms for dealing with complaints for each of these categories under their respective statutes. The OLSC has received complaints in relation to people acting in these offices, but has been unable to deal with them because they were not acting as legal practitioners at the time and are therefore outside the LSC’s jurisdiction.30
2.16 The largest number of complaints made against solicitors are made against sole practitioners. Fewer complaints are made against partners and fewer again against employed solicitors. Yet employed solicitors represent a larger proportion of the profession than either partners or sole practitioners. The Professional Standards Department of the Law Society (PSD) has offered some suggestions as to why sole practitioners attract proportionately more complaints:
This may be explained by the fact that more people tend to procure the services of smaller suburban firms. It also highlights particular problems often faced by the sole practitioner including cost and time pressures, increasing specialisation, changes to technology in the workplace and constant changes to the law.31
Table 2.2: Complaints against types of solicitors, 1999/200032
| Type of solicitor | Proportion of complaints against | Proportion of whole profession |
| Employed solicitors | 13.7% | 34% |
| Partners | 29% | 19% |
| Sole practitioners | 38.2% | 17% |
2.17 Similar trends may also be observed in relation to the location of solicitors’ practices. Sydney CBD practices involve more than half of all practising solicitors in New South Wales, yet they attract fewer complaints than suburban and rural solicitors.
Table 2.3: Complaints against solicitors by location, 1999/200033
| Location of practice | Proportion of complaints against | Proportion of whole profession |
| Sydney CBD | 26% | 56.5% |
| Sydney suburbs | 36% | 29.0% |
| Rural areas | 27% | 14.5% |
SCOPE OF COMPLAINTS
2.18 The following table, published in the OLSC’s most recent Annual Report, illustrates, in broad terms, the scope of complaints received by the LSC and dealt with by the Councils.
Table 2.4: Nature of formal complaints and consumer disputes34
| Nature of complaint† | 1999/2000 | 1998/1999 |
| General cost complaint/query | 12.6% | 10.2% |
| Negligence | 12.5% | 16.0% |
| Communication | 12.4% | 14.5% |
| Ethical matters | 9.4% | 6.0% |
| Overcharging | 9.3% | 10.5% |
| Delay | 8.7% | 7.3% |
| Misleading conduct | 6.8% | 6.4% |
| Trust fund | 6.1% | 5.6% |
| Document transfer, liens | 4.6% | 4.5% |
| Cost disclosure | 4.0% | 4.2% |
| Instructions not followed | 3.1% | 4.4% |
| Conflict of interests | 2.7% | 2.4% |
| Failure to honour undertakings | 1.8% | 1.1% |
| Quality of service | 1.6% | 2.1% |
| Document handling | 1.2% | 1.0% |
| Pressure to settle | 1.2% | 1.5% |
| Fraud (not trust fraud) | 0.8% | 1.6% |
| Compliance matters | 0.8% | 0.6% |
† One complaint may cover more than one complaint type.
Consumer disputes and misconduct
2.19 The OLSC’s Annual Reports do not distinguish between complaints in relation to unsatisfactory professional conduct and professional misconduct on the one hand, and consumer disputes on the other. The LSC makes no distinction when he first receives a written complaint and it is only in the process of dealing with it that the complaint is classified. In some cases a complaint that on its face discloses a consumer issue may turn out, on investigation, to involve issues of unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct. In others, a matter identified as a conduct issue by a client may, on investigation, turn out to be a consumer dispute. Some matters will, inevitably, involve both conduct and consumer issues. Only conduct issues may be brought before the Tribunal. Some issues relating to the consumer aspects of complaints are dealt with in Chapters 5 and 7.
INITIAL ROLE OF THE LSC
2.20 Once the LSC receives a complaint, the LSC identifies the main issues involved and ultimately characterises it as a complaint relating to unsatisfactory professional conduct, professional misconduct or a consumer dispute. The LSC may request further particulars or a statutory declaration to verify the information already provided.35 If these requests are not complied with, the LSC may dismiss the complaint.36 In 1999/2000, 253 complaints (including 211 against solicitors, 21 against barristers and 1 against a licensed conveyancer) were dismissed because further particulars were not provided.37
2.21 The LSC may then decide to:
- investigate the complaint;
- refer the complaint to the appropriate Council (if this is done the complaint must be referred “so far as practicable” within 21 days of the receipt of the complaint or further particulars requested by the LSC);38
- dismiss the complaint on the grounds that it is “vexatious, misconceived, frivolous or lacking in substance”;39 or
- if the complaint involves a consumer dispute, deal with the consumer dispute by “mediation”;40
Table 2.5: Action taken by LSC at initial stage, 1998/199941
| Action taken | Number of total complaints | Percentage of total complaints | Number against solicitors | Number against barristers | Number against
lic. conv. |
| Deal with consumer dispute by “mediation” | 1,382 | 48.0% | 1,320 | 57 | 5 |
| Refer to Council | 849 | 29.6% | 788 | 59 | 2 |
| Dismiss complaint | 197 | 6.9% | 177 | 20 | 0 |
| Investigate complaint | 62 | 2.2% | 51 | 5 | 6 |
2.22 The LSC and Councils have also recently been given the power to dismiss a complaint at any stage (including after investigation) where they are “satisfied that it is in the public interest to do so”.42 The circumstances under which a complaint may be dismissed on this basis include situations where the complaint is about a legal practitioner who has retired from practice or who is already prevented from practising.43
INVESTIGATION OF COMPLAINTS
2.23 Formal investigation is most often carried out by the relevant Council once a complaint has been referred to it by the LSC. The Councils can delegate the power to investigate as well as other powers under the Act.44 The LSC may also decide to retain and investigate some complaints on his own account. Of the 752 complaints referred to the Law Society Council in 1998/1999, 698 were referred for investigation by the Council, and, of the 59 complaints referred to the Bar Council, 57 were referred for investigation.45 The OLSC handled 2,057 files in the same period, but only 62 involved investigation as opposed to some type of formal or informal mediation.46
2.24 At the initial stage the LSC, or the Councils (on receipt of a complaint from the LSC) may:
- if the matter is a consumer dispute, refer it to mediation;47
- dismiss the complaint if further particulars are not supplied or the particulars are not verified;48
- refer matters to a costs assessor;49 or
- investigate the complaint.
2.25 The initial investigations for the Law Society Council are conducted by the Professional Standards Department (the “PSD”). The PSD makes the initial investigation and reports the facts and evidence to the Professional Conduct Committee for decision. The investigation is usually carried out by one of two sub-committees drawn from, and overseen by, the “joint” Professional Conduct Committee. The joint Committee usually consists of 24 members and includes Councillors, volunteer practitioners and lay members. A quorum for the joint Committee is three Councillors and one lay member.50
2.26 Complaints referred to the Bar Council for investigation are distributed by the Professional Affairs Director to one of four Professional Conduct Committees established by the Bar Council. Each Committee usually consists of around a dozen barristers, two lay members and an academic member and is chaired by a Senior Counsel who is a member of the Bar Council. Each committee investigates complaints referred to it and ultimately produces a report which usually includes a recommendation to the Bar Council as to what action it should take.51
Supervisory role of the Legal Services Commissioner
2.27 The LSC may take over the investigation of a complaint from a Council.52 While the OLSC’s Annual Reports do not provide statistics on the use of this power, in 1999/2000 30 complaints handled by the Law Society were “referred to, or finalised by” the LSC.53
DETERMINATIONS
2.28 The Councils or LSC must ultimately decide whether there is a “reasonable likelihood” that the Tribunal will be “comfortably satisfied” that the practitioner is guilty of either unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct.
2.29 If the Councils or the LSC conclude that there is no “reasonable likelihood” of a finding of unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct, the complaint must be dismissed.54 In 1999/2000, 902 complaints were dismissed for this reason (374 by the LSC and 528 by the Councils).55
2.30 If the Councils or the LSC conclude that there is a “reasonable likelihood” of a finding of professional misconduct, the complaint must be referred to the Tribunal.56
2.31 If the Councils or the LSC conclude that there is a “reasonable likelihood” of a finding of unsatisfactory professional conduct, the Council or LSC may:
- ·dismiss the complaint because of the practitioner’s previous good record – 22 such dismissals occurred in 1998/1999;57
- reprimand the practitioner with consent – 42 such reprimands were issued in 1998/1999;58 or
- refer the complaint to the Tribunal.59
2.32 In 1999/2000, the Bar Council referred 5 complaints to the Tribunal on the basis of unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct,60 while the Law Society referred 17 such complaints.61 Five matters were referred to the Tribunal by the LSC in the same period.62 If the complaint is dismissed or the practitioner reprimanded, payment of compensation may still be required.63 The LSC issued reprimands with orders for compensation in two instances in 1998/1999.64 No reprimands with compensation are recorded for 1999/2000.
REVIEW BY THE LSC OF COUNCIL DECISIONS
2.33 If a Council dismisses a complaint, issues a reprimand or omits allegations originally made when referring a complaint to the Tribunal, the complainant may request that the LSC review the decision.65 A Council may also request a review of its own decision and the LSC may also initiate a review.66 A review may also be requested if a Council does not notify the complainant of a decision within six months of the complaint being referred to the Council (the failure to notify is deemed to be a dismissal).67 However, the LSC may postpone the review if there is good reason for the Council’s delay.68 A request for a review must be made in writing within two months of the decision of the Council being notified to the complainant.69 In 1999/2000 149 requests for reviews were made. The majority related to decisions of the Law Society Council.70
2.34 The LSC has established an expert review panel consisting of senior practitioners, legal academics and retired judges.71 In conducting the review, the LSC must consult with the relevant Council.72 The Council must comply with the directions of the LSC and assist in the review or re-investigation.73
2.35 As a result of the review the LSC can:
- confirm the Council’s decision to dismiss the complaint or issue a reprimand;74
- refer the matter to mediation;75
- direct a reinvestigation of any complaint or part of a complaint by the Council or the OLSC;76
- issue a reprimand if the practitioner consents to the reprimand;77 or
- institute proceedings before the Tribunal or direct the Council to do so.78
2.36 Of the 130 reviews finalised in 1999/2000, the LSC confirmed the dismissal of 107 complaints against solicitors and 7 against barristers and the reprimand of 1 solicitor; and directed 5 reinvestigations by the Law Society. No reprimands were issued on review, nor were any proceedings instituted before the Tribunal as the result of a review.79
MEDIATION
2.37 When a complaint is referred to the appropriate Council, the LSC can recommend that some or all of the complaint be referred to mediation.80 A Council or LSC may, when dealing with a complaint, refer a consumer dispute for mediation.81 Mediation of a consumer dispute is broadly defined in Part 10. It is:
not limited to formal mediation procedures and extends to encompass preliminary assistance in dispute resolution, such as the giving of informal advice designed to ensure that the parties are fully aware of their rights and obligations and that there is full and open communication between the parties concerning the dispute.82
2.38 If the consumer aspect of a complaint is mediated, the complaint goes no further. However, any part of the investigation that relates to unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct must continue notwithstanding the mediation.83 The mediator may, without disclosing any information obtained in the course of the mediation, recommend that the LSC or a Council investigate the conduct of a practitioner.84 The LSC may also refer a complaint to mediation after he has finished reviewing a Council’s decision.85
2.39 Of the 2,901 complaints received against legal practitioners in 1999/2000, 103 were referred to the relevant Council for mediation (101 in relation to solicitors and 1 in relation to barristers).86 In the same period some 975 complaints against practitioners87 handled by the OLSC involved some type of formal or informal mediation.
THE TRIBUNAL
2.40 A complaint must be referred to the Tribunal if the relevant Council or the LSC decides that there is a “reasonable likelihood” of a finding of professional misconduct. A complaint may also be referred to the Tribunal if there is a “reasonable likelihood” of a finding of unsatisfactory professional conduct. In 1999/2000, the LSC referred 5 practitioners to the Tribunal, the Law Society Council referred 17 solicitors and the Bar Council referred two barristers.88 Fifty six matters were before the Tribunal on 1 July 1999. By 30 June 2000 a further 35 matters had been filed and 49 matters had been disposed of, leaving 42 matters pending.89
Composition
2.41 The composition of the Tribunal varies depending on whether the complaint is about a barrister or solicitor. The Tribunal consists of one judicial member, one barrister member and one lay member in the case of complaints against barristers. In relation to complaints against solicitors, the Tribunal consists of a judicial member, a solicitor member and a lay member.90 However, the terms used in the Act are not necessarily those used in practice. The judicial members and barrister members for complaints against barristers are drawn from a pool of practitioners referred to as “non presidential judicial (barrister) members” and the judicial members and solicitor members for complaints against solicitors are drawn from a pool of “non presidential judicial (solicitor) members”.91 The lay members are drawn from a pool of “non presidential judicial (lay) members”.92 In judgments of the Tribunal, the members are often referred to as the “presiding judicial member”, “the judicial member” and “member” respectively.93 The presiding judicial member is sometimes the Deputy President (Legal Services).
Parties
2.42 When a complaint is brought to the Tribunal, the LSC or the relevant Council becomes the informant.94 The complainant cannot be the informant before the Tribunal. The legal practitioner complained against, the relevant Council, the LSC, the Attorney General and the complainant can all appear before the Tribunal,95 but complainants must get leave from the Tribunal to appear.96 Anyone else may only appear subject to the Tribunal giving them leave. Those appearing may do so in person or they may be represented by a legal practitioner.97
Commencing proceedings
2.43 When the statement commencing proceedings before the Tribunal (referred to as an “information”) is filed the practitioner must then file a reply to the allegations raised.98 The Tribunal may, on application of the LSC or Council who laid the information, vary the information to omit or add allegations.99
Hearings
2.44 Hearings before the Tribunal are generally conducted in public.100 However, a matter relating to unsatisfactory professional conduct will usually be heard in private unless the presence of the public is found to be “in the public interest or the interests of justice”.101
Decisions
2.45 If the Tribunal is satisfied that the practitioner is not guilty, the Tribunal must dismiss the complaint. In 1999/2000, of the 49 Tribunal outcomes, six complaints were dismissed.102
2.46 If the practitioner is found guilty of professional misconduct, the Tribunal can order that the practitioner be removed from the roll of practitioners.103 Five practitioners were removed from the roll in 1999/2000.104 In addition, if the practitioner is found guilty of either professional misconduct or unsatisfactory professional conduct, the Tribunal can:
- order that the practitioner’s practising certificate be cancelled;105
- order that the practitioner not be issued with a practising certificate until a specified time has elapsed;106
- fine the practitioner up to $50,000 for professional misconduct and up to $5,000 for unsatisfactory professional conduct (to be paid to the Public Purpose Fund107 );108
- issue a public or private reprimand;109 and
- require the practitioner to undertake and complete a specified legal education course.110
2.47 The outcomes of matters heard by the Tribunal in 1998/1999 are outlined in the following table.111
Table 2.6: Results of Tribunal proceedings, 1 July 1999 to 30 June 2000
| Results of proceedings | Number |
| No jurisdiction/withdrawn† | 19 |
| Dismissed | 6 |
| Removed from roll | 5 |
| Reprimanded and fined | 5 |
| Restricted practising certificate/reprimanded and fined | 3 |
| s 48I and s 48K orders.112 | 3 |
| Suspended from practice | 3 |
| Fined | 2 |
| Reprimanded | 2 |
| Suspended from practice/reprimanded and fined | 1 |
| TOTAL | 49 |
† Matters affected by the Barwick decision of the High Court.
2.48 The relatively low number of dismissals probably reflects the requirement that there be a “reasonable likelihood” of a finding of unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct before Tribunal proceedings can be initiated by the relevant Council or LSC.
Compensation
2.49 The Tribunal can order a lawyer found guilty of misconduct to pay compensation. Compensation can be either in the form of a payment by the lawyer, a waiver of fees or the repayment of fees already paid. The evidence necessary for the Tribunal to make a decision about compensation must be provided by the complainant because the Councils and LSC have no standing in relation to compensation. The compensation can be up to $10,000 or more if the practitioner and complainant both consent.113 No compensation need be paid if the complainant has received or is entitled to receive compensation by court order or from the Fidelity Fund.114
Costs
2.50 Costs orders can be made against a practitioner who is found guilty of professional misconduct or unsatisfactory professional conduct.115 If the practitioner is found not guilty, the practitioner’s costs may be met (but only in “special circumstances”) from the Public Purpose Fund.116
TRIBUNAL APPEAL PANEL
2.51 Any order or decision of the Tribunal may be appealed to a Tribunal Appeal Panel:117
- on a question of law, as of right; and
- in relation to the merits of a decision, by leave from the Appeal Panel.118
2.52 An Appeal Panel must consist of one presidential judicial member, one other judicial member and one non-judicial member.119 In practice these will most likely be the Deputy President (Legal Services), a member who is a legal practitioner, and a lay member of the Tribunal.
2.53 The appeal must be made within 28 days of the Tribunal furnishing the parties with written reasons.120 As at 30 June 2000, only seven appeals had been lodged from the Tribunal to the Appeal Panel since the commencement of the new arrangements in October 1998.121
APPEALS TO THE SUPREME COURT
2.54 An appeal can be made to the Supreme Court against a decision of the Appeal Panel, but only in relation to a question of law.122
COMPLAINTS ARISING DURING AN INVESTIGATION
2.55 Under the current scheme, the same procedural requirements must be followed in relation to additional complaints that arise during the course of an investigation as are followed with respect to the initial complaint. An additional complaint that arises during an investigation of a legal practitioner must therefore be separately initiated, investigated and a decision made about whether to refer it to the Tribunal, before it can be included with an already existing complaint or set of complaints. A formal investigative stage, between initiation of the a complaint and referral to the Tribunal, must take place to satisfy the requirements of Part 10 in relation to the investigation of complaints.123
DEALING WITH COMPLAINTS OUTSIDE PART 10
2.56 Not all complaints against lawyers are handled under Part 10. Complaints can also be handled by the courts or internally by firms of practitioners and other similar organisations, either government or private.
Supreme Court
2.57 The Supreme Court retains an inherent jurisdiction with respect to the disciplining of practitioners,124 and also, with other courts, has a general role in deciding negligence claims against practitioners. The Bar Council decided to apply to the Supreme Court to strike off one barrister in 1998/1999.125 The Supreme Court is strongly in favour of retaining its ultimate authority in relation to fitness for practice by determining who should be on the roll of legal practitioners.126
Internal resolution
2.58 Some major organisations that employ solicitors have internal complaints management systems which may keep some matters out of the system established by Part 10. For example, the Legal Aid Commission has a mechanism for dealing with and resolving complaints from its clients. This mechanism has been described by the Audit Office as “comprehensive” and includes systems for monitoring client satisfaction.127 The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions has a Service Relations Office which provides a point of contact for complaints and suggestions and “seeks to identify the causes of dissatisfactions and tries to eliminate them”.128
FOOTNOTES
1. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 135.
2. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 136(1).
3. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 136(2)(a).
4. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 136(2)(b).
5. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 7 and 27.
6. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 137.
7. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 137(2).
8. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 137(3).
9. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 137(4).
10. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 28.
11. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 127(2).
12. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 127(1).
13. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 143.
14. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 140.
15. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171D. See para 2.49.
16. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 138.
17. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 134.
18. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 27.
19. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 25.
20. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 128(1).
21. As part of a system jointly administered by the OLSC and the Department of Fair Trading: See Conveyancers Licensing Act 1995 (NSW) s 82. The Department of Fair Trading is currently conducting a review of the regulation of conveyancers, including the operation and application of Part 10 in respect of conveyancers: New South Wales, Department of Fair Trading, Review of the Conveyancers Licensing Act 1995 (Issues Paper, 2000).
22. Public Notaries Act 1997 (NSW) s 14.
23. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 128(2). Complaints against Judicial Officers in New South Wales are dealt with in accordance with Judicial Officers Act 1986 (NSW): see Bruce v Cole (1998) 45 NSWLR 163.
24. OLSC, Preliminary Submission at 11-12.
25. See Arbitration (Civil Actions) Act 1983 (NSW) s 5.
26. See Commercial Arbitration Act 1984 (NSW).
27. See, for example, District Court Act 1973 (NSW) s 164E; Fair Trading Tribunal Act 1998 (NSW) Sch 3; Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) s 61H; and Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 110K.
28. Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW) Pt 72.
29. See Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 173(1) and Pt 11 Div 6, especially s 208S.
30. A number of submissions have suggested extending the scope of the complaints system to cover various people including judges, costs assessors and legal practitioners acting as arbitrators, mediators and referees: see, for example, B Golder, Preliminary Submission at 1-2; and NSW Legal Reform Group, Preliminary Submission at para 6.3; W Lawrence, Preliminary Submissions; while others have suggested the powers of the Judicial Commission might be extended to cover such situations: NSW Bar Association, Preliminary Submission 1 at para 66.
31. Law Society of NSW, Professional Standards Department, Annual Report 1998/1999 at 14. See also Law Society of NSW, Professional Standards Department, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 11.
32. Law Society of NSW, Professional Standards Department, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 11-12.
33. Law Society of NSW, Professional Standards Department, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 12.
34. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 26.
35. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 136(3).
36. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 139(1).
37. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 29.
38. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 141.
39. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 139(2).
40. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 144.
41. OLSC, Annual Report 1998/1999 at 54. 1998/1999 figures are used in this chapter where the figures in the OLSC’s Annual Report 1999/2000 either fail to identify the required category sufficiently, or contradict the figures in the Law Society of NSW, Professional Standards Department, Annual Report 1999/2000.
42. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 155A(1).
43. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 155A(2).
44. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 51(2) and 54(1A).
45. OLSC, Annual Report 1998/1999 at 5.
46. OLSC, Annual Report 1998/1999 at 54.
47. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 144.
48. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 139(1).
49. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 153.
50. Law Society of NSW, Professional Standards Department, Annual Report 1998/1999 at 18.
51. J Gormly, “Conduct of Complaints Against Barristers” [1998] Stop Press (No 48) at 1; NSW Bar Association, Annual Report 1999 at 16-24.
52. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 147A.
53. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 29.
54. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 155(4).
55. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 29.
56. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 155(2).
57. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 155(3)(b). OLSC, Annual Report 1998/1999 at 11, 57, 58.
58. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 155(3)(a). OLSC, Annual Report 1998/1999 at 11, 57, 58.
59. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 155(2).
60. NSW Bar Association, Annual Report 2000 at 30.
61. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 29.
62. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 29.
63. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 155(5).
64. OLSC, Annual Report 1998/1999 at 11.
65. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 158(1).
66. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 159(2).
67. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 158(4).
68. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 158(5).
69. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 158(2) and s 158(3).
70. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 31.
71. OLSC, Annual Report 1998/1999 at 47.
72. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 159(3).
73. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 160(4) and s 161.
74. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 160(1)(a).
75. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 160(1)(b).
76. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 160(1)(c), (c1) and (c2).
77. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 160(1)(c3).
78. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 160(1)(d).
79. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 31.
80. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 141(2).
81. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 144.
82. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 145A.
83. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 144(2).
84. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 147(2).
85. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 160(1)(b).
86. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 27.
87. 896 in relation to solicitors; 37 in relation to barristers; and 3 in relation to licensed conveyancers: OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 27.
88. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 29.
89. ADT, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 20.
90. Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 (NSW) Sch 2 Pt 3 cl 4.
91. The current membership of these pools is detailed in New South Wales, Law Almanac 2000 (LBC Information Services, Sydney, 2000) at 83.
92. Law Almanac 2000 at 83.
93. See, for example, Law Society of New South Wales v Hurley [1999] NSWADT 140.
94. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 167(1).
95. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 169(1).
96. Unless they are applying for compensation, in which case they may appear as of right: Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 169(2).
97. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 169(4).
98. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 167(3).
99. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 167A(1).
100. In accordance with s 75 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 (NSW): Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 170(2).
101. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 170(1).
102. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 31.
103. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171C(1)(a).
104. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 31.
105. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171C(1)(b).
106. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171C(1)(c).
107. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171I.
108. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171C(1)(d).
109. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171C(1)(e)
110. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171C(1)(f).
111. OLSC, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 31.
112. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 48I and s 48K place restrictions on who a practitioner may associate with or employ.
113. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171D.
114. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171D(3).
115. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171E(1).
116. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171E(2).
117. Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171F.
118. Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 (NSW) s 113(2).
119. Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 (NSW) s 24.
120. Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 (NSW) s 113(3).
121. One in 1998/1999 and six in 1999/2000: ADT, Annual Report 1998/1999 at 37; ADT, Annual Report 1999/2000 at 21.
122. Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 (NSW) s 119(1).
123. See Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) Pt 10 Div 5. See also Barwick v Law Society of New South Wales (2000) 74 ALJR 419 at para 61-64.
124. A role expressly preserved by Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW) s 171M(1). See Barwick v Law Society of New South Wales (2000) 74 ALJR 419 at para 118.
125. Information supplied by the NSW Bar Association (26 June 2000).
126. J Spigelman, Preliminary Submission at 1; But see IP 18 at para 6.28-6.29 in relation to appeals from decisions of the Tribunal.
127. New South Wales, Audit Office, Key Performance Indicators (Performance Audit Report, 1998) at 54. As at the end of June 1999 there has been no external reporting of this system.
128. New South Wales, Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Annual Report 1998/1999 at 63.
