Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
AAP
AAP
National
Margaret Scheikowski

Barrister spared jail time for contempt

A Sydney barrister who flagrantly disregarded injunctions has been given a suspended jail term. (AAP)

A Sydney barrister who repeatedly disobeyed injunctions preventing him from engaging in legal practice has been given a suspended jail term.

"Overall, his conduct reveals a breathtaking and flagrant disregard for this Court's authority," said Justice Robert Beech-Jones in the NSW Supreme Court on Friday.

He ordered that Michael Rollinson be imprisoned for nine months, but suspended it on condition that for three years he refrains from engaging in legal practice in NSW.

The 62-year-old, who now lists his occupation as "unemployed", had pleaded guilty to three charges of contempt.

"There is no doubt that each of them represented a serious challenge to the Court's authority that was exacerbated by the contemnor's status as an officer of the very Court he deliberately and repeatedly defied."

He was admitted as a barrister in 1995 and held a practising certificate until June 30, 2021.

But his application for a certificate renewal for the next year was unsuccessful because he didn't pay all the required fee.

Justice Beech-Jones found he was thereafter in contempt of court for multiple breaches of judges' orders preventing his practice over a series of months.

They included an appearance in Wollongong Local Court in September 2021, in defiance of a judge's specific order.

In an affidavit, the barrister said his deteriorating financial situation had declined further when the pandemic begun.

He had "depleted my savings almost entirely" when his fees became due but "foolishly continued to practise" when he knew he didn't have a valid certificate.

He said that he "felt it was not feasible to stop work on my matters" because both clients and solicitors were relying on him and he had been briefed for a "long time, so I could not pass the briefs on".

The judge found the attack on the authority of the court was so grave that a term of imprisonment must be imposed.

But he decided to suspend the term having regard to psychiatric evidence and his prior blameless conduct.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.