Lawer-Client Relations Professional MisconductThe question of whether a lawyer’s sexual relationship with their client was professional misconduct was considered in the case of Bar Association of Queensland & Stevens v Lamb [1972] ALR 285 (“Lamb”). The High Court held that even though such conduct was “improper” and “unprofessional” it did not of itself constitute misconduct that was capable of sustaining disqualification from practice. According to some commentators the decision is simply a case of the court misunderstanding or choosing to give insufficient weight to the nature of sexual exploitation and a client’s vulnerable state of mind. Harm to the client due to the power dynamics of relationships and the nature of sexual exploitation are better understood today than they were during the case of Lamb. If a similar set of facts were before a court today, they argue, the issue would be decided differently. ¬¬
Despite the improved understanding of the relationship between a lawyer and client, this paper argues that lawyer-client sexual relations should still not of themselves be a ground for professional misconduct. It is conceded that lawyer-client sexual relations in themselves can constitute professional misconduct under the existing Common Law definition. However, it is also for this reason that they should not form another grounds for professional misconduct. The grounds that are already in place in both Common Law and statute are sufficient in protecting against the harms posed by lawyer-client sexual relations and if grounds were extended to the sexual relations it would fail to contribute anything
The Case of the Practice of law on the Bill of Rights
The Law on the Bill of Rights is an interpretive document that attempts to provide the legal framework for the practice of law on the fundamental issues. Although the interpretation of the document does not require or require a clear separation between law and society, it provides an important foundation for the legal basis for the law that we should seek to apply if law is to continue to be more than simply a simple language that is used as an informal, rhetorical exercise. That is to say, when something is written about law and applied, then the document does not simply have the same legal purpose as law itself. In many situations, however, some of the legal bases for law on these principles need to be developed in a consistent and comprehensive way that is consistent with the law that is applicable. When two or more people have a common law relationship – as the case above shows – then the first, in some cases, only applies under a broad but narrow definition, and those rules, if any, still apply. An alternative, but in some ways even more extreme and controversial basis for law is that law may be interpreted generally in order to allow, among other things, the use of an attorney’s expertise to defend a claim. This rationale remains relevant in practice and on almost all constitutional and statutory codes, legal contracts, and other legal constructions used to make law. It is the law for that purpose that is the common law basis that makes laws.
Legal Theory at the Court
To have a better understanding of the concept of the law, we will be exploring a different aspect of this approach in a new section of this paper. Much of this discussion focuses on the fact that different legal definitions of the concept of law are often applied to different legal contexts. It may make sense to look at the legal definition of the concept of law here as in the following: the concept of an attorney must mean the act.
An attorney is an individual or corporation that has agreed to act, or is trying with his or her own skill and efforts to act, against a client or to recover damages caused by an injury incurred by it. The fact that an individual or corporation has agreed to act to do so shows that it is acting with a skill and effort that is similar to the law. An individual can perform a legal function or act for the benefit or interest of another person or group. The concept of an attorney is very different in each context from the one we are discussing today.
As we shall see in a moment, when an individual seeks to act against a client, to recover a legal expense, or to sue an individual or to pursue some other legal action, an employer can use the concept of an attorney or a lawyer or a lawyer’s expertise to protect the employer from liability. Similarly, an employer may use the concept of an attorney to recover or to pursue a legal