Council of the Queensland Law Society v Wright [2001] QCA 58

Council of the Queensland Law Society v Wright [2001] QCA 58 (27 February 2001)

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

The Council of the Qld Law Society Inc v Wright [2001] QCA 58

PARTIES:

THE COUNCIL OF THE QUEENSLAND LAW SOCIETY INC

(applicant/respondent)

v

WENDY ANN WRIGHT

(respondent/appellant)

FILE NO/S:

Appeal No 349 of 2000

Solicitors' Complaints Tribunal Charge No 29

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

General Civil Appeal

ORIGINATING COURT:

Solicitors' Complaints Tribunal

DELIVERED ON:

27 February 2001

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

5 October 2000

JUDGES:

McMurdo P, Davies JA and Helman J

Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made.

ORDER:

Appeal dismissed with costs

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES - LAWYERS - DUTIES AND LIABLITIES - TO COURT - MISCONDUCT, UNFITNESS AND DISCIPLINE - GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINARY ORDERS - IN GENERAL - MISLEADING COURT AND PERVERTING COURSE OF JUSTICE - DISCIPLINARY ORDERS - STRIKING OFF AND ANCILLARY ORDERS - Solicitors' Complaints Tribunal found appellant guilty of professional misconduct - order that she be struck off the roll of solicitors - whether appellant knowingly misled the judge at summary judgment -whether appellant breached her duty to the court - whether appellant knowingly relied on false affidavit - whether appellant knowingly misled the court on material matters - whether appellant misled judge as to financial position of client's company - whether appellant attempted to suborn a witness to the Solicitors' Complaints Tribunal - whether appellant knowingly made false claims to the Queensland Law Society - whether the appellant's denial of allegations resulted in a breach of natural justice - whether fresh evidence admissible - whether penalty imposed was excessive.

Queensland Law Society Act 1952, s 5F Part 2A, s 6M(I), 6Z

UCPR, 766(1)

Attorney-General v Gregory [1998] QCA 409, Appeal No 5511 of 1998, 4 December 1998, referred to

Clarke v Japan Machines (Australia) Pty Ltd [1984] 1 QdR 404, considered

Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Quade (1993) 178 CLR 134, considered

Gallagher v The Queen [1986] HCA 26; (1986) 160 CLR 392, referred to

Giannarelli v Wraith (1988) 165 CLR 543, referred to

Horne v Commissioner for Main Roads [1991] 2 QdR 38, considered

Mickelburg v The Queen [1989] HCA 35; (1989) 167 CLR 259, referred to

R v Main; ex parte Attorney-General [1999] QCA 148, CA No 387 of 1998, 30 April 1999, mentioned

Smith v New South Wales Bar Association (No2) [1992] HCA 36; (1992) 176 CLR 256, mentioned

COUNSEL:

C E K Hampson QC, with P W Hackett, for the appellant

W Sofronoff QC for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Morrow & Associates for the appellant

Clayton Utz for the respondent