Chin v Legal Practice Board Western Australia

[2009] WASCA 117

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Appeal
2. › Leave to appeal
3. › State Administrative Tribunal decisions
4. › Whether reasonable prospects of success
5. › Grounds prolix and containing vexatious material
6. › State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 105
1. Administrative Law
2. › State Administrative Tribunal
3. › Review of decision
4. › De novo hearing
5. › Whether challenge to original decision-maker's conduct relevant where tribunal conducts de novo review
1. Administrative Law
2. › State Administrative Tribunal
3. › Deprivation of capacity to pursue vocation
4. › Whether conditions on practice certificate amount to deprivation
5. › Legal effect versus practical effect
6. › State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 105(13)
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Grounds of appeal
3. › Requirement for succinctness and conciseness
4. › Non-compliance with rules as to form
5. › Supreme Court (Court of Appeal) Rules 2005 (WA), r 32(4)

Quick Take

Where the State Administrative Tribunal conducts a de novo hearing, grounds of appeal challenging the conduct of the original decision-maker are misconceived and have no reasonable prospect of success. For the purposes of s 105(13) of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), it is the legal effect, not the practical effect, of the Tribunal's decision that determines whether a person has been deprived of the capacity to lawfully pursue a vocation. The question whether conditions restricting a practitioner to employed practice (as opposed to cancellation) constitute such deprivation was left open.