A New South Wales barrister who continued to work as a lawyer despite not having a practising certificate – including in a case before the high court – has been sentenced to a suspended jail term.
Michael Rollinson pleaded guilty to three counts of contempt in the NSW supreme court last month. In orders released by the court on Friday, NSW supreme court Justice Robert Beech-Jones described his conduct as “breathtaking”.
The NSW bar association alleged Rollinson had failed to pay the entirety of his practising certificate renewal fees for the 2021-22 practice year.
Beech-Jones found each breach represented a serious challenge to the court’s authority that was exacerbated by Rollison’s status “as an officer of the very court he deliberately and repeatedly defied”.
Rollinson had performed most aspects of the practice of a barrister despite not having a certificate, Beech-Jones found, including acting in matters from local courts to the high court of Australia.
“His conduct reveals a breathtaking and flagrant disregard for this court’s authority,” Beech-Jones said in relation to the second count.
“The third contempt is equally breathtaking. [Rollinson] was specifically told, and then ordered, by a supreme court judge not to appear in the local court at Wollongong the following day yet he did so.”
Rollinson had been a barrister since 1995. In an apology for his actions, which was included in Beech-Jones’ orders, he wrote: “My conduct in regard to all the above incidents was unacceptable and contrary to the standards of conduct expected of a barrister, and I apologise for that conduct.
“I felt that the solicitors who had been instructing me depended on me to continue. I felt significant loyalty to them. I was reluctant to tell them I did not have a practising certificate as I felt that I would be letting them down.
“I also did not want my predicament of not having a practising certificate to get more publicity than it had to because I found it embarrassing.”
He was also found to have had a personality disorder which may have contributed to his conduct.
Mark Robinson SC, an experienced barrister who had worked with Rollinson on multiple cases, described him as “exceptionally loyal”.
“I have never observed him to be anything other than law-abiding, truthful, reliable and dependable,” Robinson wrote in an affidavit.
He said the charges were “exceptions to his otherwise excellent legal career” and he would be “happy to work with him again in the future”.
Beech-Jones found that Rollinson’s personality disorder potentially contributed to his commission of the contempts, but did not accept that it materially reduced his moral culpability or the need for general deterrence.
“Someone who assumes the responsibilities of counsel and is able to function effectively as such for over 20 years does not have their moral culpability reduced because an apparently long‑standing personality disorder may have impacted on a deliberate refusal to comply with a court order,” he said.
“If a person can function in a highly regulated system with a particular condition for over 20 years then the existence of that condition does not diminish such a blatant disregard for court orders.”
Rollinson was sentenced to nine month’s imprisonment, suspended for three years. He was also ordered to pay the costs of the NSW bar association in relation to earlier court hearings.
