Regulation 19 certificates can be used by the legal hierarchy to discourage complaints of sexual harassment: NSW Law Society and the NSW Legal Profession Admission Board have allowed the Regulation to be used to deter, discourage and discredit complaints of poor teaching, course delivery,what more sexual harassment

by Ganesh Sahathevan

                                                     
                                                               
The Hon Chief Justice Susan Kiefel AC has relied on the findings of a one person inquiry to publicly condemn a former justice of the High Court.



Certificates issued pursuant to  Regulation 19 (Reg 19) of The Legal Profession Uniform Admission Rules certify to admitting bodies such as the NSW Legal Profession Admission Board that law graduates who seek  admission to practise law have not been subject to disciplinary action while pursuing their legal studies,  including the compulsory  Professional Legal Training course.The NSW Law Society was made aware and queried about these issues but chose to remain silent. 

 Reg 19 is applied broadly to include anything that the issuer might find offensive, or threatening to its business. Consequently the power to issue the certificate can be used to force the withdrawal of any adverse reports against the issuer.The College Of Law and the NSW LPAB's attempts to hinder and discredit an investigation by this writer into the College's business practises in Australia and Malaysia is a case in point.  

 It is doubtful that Reg 19 was meant to be used for anything other than academic misconduct. It is clear that it is being abused, and one cannot tell if that abuse has included concealment of complaints of sexual harassment. It is left to Chief Justice Kiefel to follow through with her investigations to determine if this has been the case.

 TO BE READ WITH 

LEGAL PROFESSION UNIFORM ADMISSION RULES 2015 - REG 19

Student conduct reports

19 Student conduct reports 


(1) An application for a compliance certificate must include a report by:
(a) any tertiary academic institution at which the applicant obtained the academic qualification upon which the applicant relies as satisfying the requirements of rule 5 (1), and 
(b) any practical legal training provider attended by the applicant, 
about the conduct of the applicant. 
(2) A report under subrule (1) must reveal:
(a) whether or not the applicant was the subject of any disciplinary action, howsoever described, taken by the institution or the provider, and 
(b) the outcome of any such disciplinary action, and 
must be prepared within 6 months before the application is made. 
(3) If the Board so requests in writing, the applicant must take all reasonable steps to cause the institution or practical legal training provider referred to in subrule (1) to provide for inspection or copying by the Board any documents that are relevant to the Board's consideration of any disciplinary action referred to in subrule (2).


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ben Robert-Smith : How was Justice Anthony Besanko of the Federal Court able to find that the crime of murder has a civil twin, which can be determined on a balance of probabilities

Image
 by Ganesh Sahathevam                                                                                                                  The Hon Justice Anthony Besanko Media reports about the Ben Robert-Smith defamation matter  have at least given the impression, if not asserted,  that Justice Anthony Besanko of the Federal Court found  that Robert-Smith had committed murder. Most if not all reports have been at pains to stress that the finding was based on a balance of probabilities, and not beyond a reasonable doubt, for the matter was a civil and not criminal matter.  However,  reading his summary one can immediately see that Justice Besanko  found not that Roberts-Smith had committed murder but that the " respondents had, (on  a balance of probabilities) established the substantial truth"  that  Roberts-Smith had committed murder.  However, murder is a  crime and a finding of murder in a criminal court (which is the court in which crimes like murder can be determined!) inv
Read more

Who authorised former NSW Police Commissioner Mick Fuller to say anything about the Berejiklian era quarantine fee and why? Fuller's notice confirms suspicion that NSW Berejiklian government had no basis to impose the quarantine fee, nor quarantine persons who were COVID negative 

Image
 by Ganesh Sahathevan      Premier Gladys Berejiklian with NSW Police Commissioner Mick Fuller and Brigadier Mick             Garraway Who authorised former  NSW Police Commissioner Mick Fuller  to say anything about the  Berejiklian era  quarantine fee and why? Fuller's issuance of his  COVID  quarantine notice, and subsequent silence, would seem to confirm suspicions raised on this blog that NSW's Berejiklian government had no basis to impose its quarantine fee. Fuller's conduct also adds to suspicion that the Berejiklian government did not have the authority, even under its COVID emergency powers, to quarantine persons who were COVID negative. International arrivals had to test negative for COVID before boarding their flights to Sydney, and tests had to be administered within 72 hours of departure. Quarantine on arrival of those who exhibited no COVID symptoms was quite likely unnecessary. It did, of course help bolster Gladys Berejiklian's approval ratings. TO BE RE
Read more

Revenue NSW COVID Quarantine Fee payment demand notices suggest that Police Commissioner Mick Fuller breached the law with his demand for quarantine fees

Image
 By Ganesh Sahathevan  Anyone who has received a Revenue NSW Quarantine Fee demand for payment notice  will be familiar with these words that are contained in the notice: What is the quarantine service fee? A mandatory quarantine service fee applies to all travellers arriving in New South Wales (NSW) who are required to quarantine as part of the public health order. Mandatory quarantine is needed to stop the spread. of COVID-19 in NSW The qurantine fee has been charged pursuant to Section 70 of  the NSW Health Act. However, as previously reported, that section does not permit any imposition of mandatory fees.  However, in apparent defiance of Section 70 of the Health Act, Fuller issued a notice   in which he said  that Revenue NSW " will be charging a mandatory quarantine fee". TOE BE READ WITH  Former NSW Police Commissioner Mick Fuller said in his notice that Revenue NSW " will be charging a mandatory quarantine fee" - Former NSW Ministers Hazzard, Tudehope insis
Read more