Khosa v Legal Profession Complaints Committee

[2021] WASCA 34

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Stay of proceedings
3. › Stay pending appeal
4. › Interlocutory orders of tribunal
5. › Whether appeal rendered nugatory
6. › Whether reasonable prospects of success
7. › Whether balance of convenience favours stay
8. › State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 106
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Appeals
3. › Leave to appeal
4. › Appeal from interlocutory orders of tribunal
5. › Whether interlocutory nature of orders a factor against grant of leave
6. › State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 105
1. Legal Profession
2. › Disciplinary proceedings
3. › State Administrative Tribunal
4. › Power to order uplift and forensic examination of document
5. › Whether ancillary power under s 73 of SAT Act supports order for forensic testing
6. › State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), ss 34, 35, 72, 73

Quick Take

Where a stay of interlocutory orders pending appeal would be rendered nugatory and the grounds are reasonably arguable, the court may nonetheless refuse a stay if the balance of convenience favours refusal, and may instead fashion less restrictive alternative orders to protect the appellant's interests — such as permitting the impugned action to proceed but withholding the results until the appeal is determined. In legal profession disciplinary proceedings, the public interest in prompt resolution of serious misconduct allegations is a relevant factor in the balance of convenience.