← All Authorities
Hong Kong Leading Case proportionalitygrounds procedural impropriety

A Solicitor v Law Society of Hong Kong

(2008) 11 HKCFAR 117
JurisdictionHong Kong
CourtHK Court of Final Appeal
Year2008
StatusBinding authority

Summary

CFA held that in solicitor disciplinary proceedings the standard of proof is flexible and sanctions must be proportionate to the misconduct found.

Key Principle

professional discipline; solicitor misconduct; Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal; standard of proof; proportionality of sanction

Area of Law

public-law

Related Cases

CPCF v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2015) 255 CLR 514

The Maritime Powers Act 2013 authorised detention and return of asylum seekers at sea; executive power extends to removal of non-citizens from Australian waters.

Isbester v Knox City Council (2015) 255 CLR 135

A reasonable apprehension of bias arises where a council officer who lodged a complaint against a dog owner also participated in the decision to order destruction of the dog.

Plaintiff M47/2012 v Director-General of Security (2012) 251 CLR 1

Ministerial power to detain and remove non-citizens under the Migration Act must be exercised in accordance with the Act; adverse ASIO security assessments do not compel indefinite detention.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of A Solicitor v Law Society of Hong Kong and how it applies to your situation.

Explain A Solicitor v Law Society of H...