Section 89(5)(a) of the Legal Practitioners Act 1981 (SA) does not confer a free-standing power on the Supreme Court to act on Tribunal findings; it operates only as a corollary to referrals made under s 89(4). However, the Court may have regard to Tribunal findings under a combination of an implication derived from s 89(1) and the Court's inherent jurisdiction preserved by s 88A. The questions whether an interstate tribunal such as the WASAT constitutes a 'court' for the purposes of s 89(5)(b), and whether Federal courts are 'courts of any State' for those purposes, remain open. A practitioner's conduct in disciplinary proceedings themselves — including persistent unmeritorious jurisdictional challenges, baseless allegations against the Commissioner and judicial officers, and inability to engage with the legal issues — can be the principal basis for a finding of unfitness and strike-off.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.