A summary of recent court decisions involving NSW solicitors.
NEW SOUTH WALES
Bryl v Law Society of New South Wales [2026] NSWSC 22 (4 February 2026)
On 4 February 2026, the Supreme Court of New South Wales published its decision in proceedings commenced by Mr Artem Bryl seeking judicial review of a decision of the Council of the Law Society of NSW (Council) to refuse to renew his practising certificate because the Council considered him not to be a fit and proper person for the purposes of s 45 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW) (Uniform Law).
Mr Bryl sought judicial review under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) rather than making his application under s 100 of the Uniform Law.
Prior to Mr Bryl lodging his application to renew his practising certificate, the New South Wales Legal Services Commissioner (Commissioner) had made two referrals dated 7 July 2023 and 8 March 2024 (Referrals), respectively, to the Law Society of NSW concerning correspondence which the Commissioner had received from the Registrar of the Court of Appeal. The correspondence was related to the conduct of Mr Bryl and another lawyer. Council had noted that those concerns were relevant to its consideration of Mr Bryl’s application to renew his practising certificate.
Ultimately, Mr Bryl’s Summons was dismissed with costs.
Odtojan v Law Society of New South Wales [2026] NSWSC 23 (4 February 2026)
On 4 February 2026, the Supreme Court of New South Wales published its decision in proceedings commenced by Ms Marie Odtojan, who sought judicial review of decisions of the Council of the Law Society of NSW (Council) to refuse to renew her practising certificate and to appoint a manager to her law practice. The Council had considered her not to be a fit and proper person for the purposes of s 45 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW) (Uniform Law).
Prior to Ms Odtojan lodging her application to renew her practising certificate, the New South Wales Legal Services Commissioner (Commissioner) had made two referrals dated 7 July 2023 and 8 March 2024 (Referrals) respectively to the Law Society of NSW concerning correspondence which the Commissioner had received from the Registrar of the Court of Appeal. The correspondence related to the conduct of Ms Odtojan and another lawyer. Council had noted that those concerns were relevant to its consideration of Ms Odtojan’s application to renew.
Ultimately, Ms Odtojan’s Summons was dismissed with costs.
WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Legal Services and Complaints Committee -v- Frost [2026] WASC 22 (6 February 2026)
On 6 February 2026, the Supreme Court of Western Australia (Supreme Court of WA) published its decision in disciplinary proceedings commenced by the Western Australia Legal Services and Complaints Committee (Committee). The Supreme Court of WA ordered that Mr Brad Haden Frost’s name be removed from the roll of Australian lawyers maintained by the Supreme Court of WA pursuant to s 23(1) of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (WA).
The order was made following an earlier decision of the Western Australia State Administrative Tribunal which found that Mr Frost had engaged in several acts of professional misconduct and recommended that that Mr Frost’s name be removed from the roll. The conduct engaged in by Mr Frost included intentionally and repeatedly misleading an employee in relation to an employment opportunity, intentionally and repeatedly misleading the Committee and swearing a false statutory declaration.
Legal Practice Board and Woodhouse [2026] WASC 95 (25 March 2026)
On 25 March 2026, the Supreme Court of Western Australia (Supreme Court of WA) published its decision in proceedings commenced by the Legal Practice Board of Western Australia (Board), ordering that Mr Clayton Steven Woodhouse’s name be removed from the roll of Australian lawyers maintained by the Supreme Court of WA pursuant to s 23(1)(b) of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (WA).
The order was made following the criminal conviction of Mr Woodhouse of one charge of gaining a pecuniary benefit with intent to defraud by deceit or fraudulent means, contrary to s 409(1)(c) of the Criminal Code 1913 (WA). The conviction encompassed 27 instances of offending by Mr Woodhouse while he was an employed solicitor of a law practice.
