Caruana v Dental Council of NSW [2021] NSWCATOD 179
Appeals against regulators should be about the practitioner not their ‘representatives’.
In this recent case in NSW, a dentist was represented by an agent, who was not a lawyer. When the Dental Council discovered that the agent was a disqualified lawyer, the case then turned to the ‘agent’ rather than the dentist who was appealing.
Appeals are generally not matters covered by insurance. If you have a decision that you consider is unfair or in error, seek proper advice promptly within the usual period (often 28 days) before filing the appeal. This advice might seem expensive but it will likely result in an informed decision as to whether to proceed or not. Seeking assistance from persons lacking the experience and proper accreditation in the appeal jurisdiction can be a waste of resources.
If as a dentist you are appealing a decision of a regulator in NSW or elsewhere, it is prudent to get legal advice from a lawyer. It seems implicit in this matter that the disqualified lawyer did not suggest that they were a practising lawyer, but the Tribunal was not going to allow representation by a disqualified lawyer for the reasons set out by Marks J.
Assumedly the matter will proceed at a later date.
Appeals are generally not matters covered by insurance. If you have a decision that is unfair or incorrect, seek proper advice promptly within the usual period (often 28 days) before filing the appeal. This advice might seem expensive but it will likely result in an informed decision as to whether to proceed or not. Seeking assistance from persons lacking the experience and proper accreditation in the appeal jurisdiction can be a waste of resources.
For the full case see here
