They included multiple claims of unethical conduct, conduct in breach of the practitioner’s obligations to the court, and criminal conduct.

According to the Federal Court judgment, BWG was a finance broker retained by the Edmonds to obtain finance, but no loans proceeded and no funds were ever advanced in respect of the retainer.

A deed of acknowledgment was executed in April 2018, which noted BWG lodged a caveat over various properties following a failure by the Edmonds to make a payment. The judgment added this caveat was eventually removed after a Court of Appeal judgment.

In an earlier court judgment, it was noted Ms Edmonds served a prison sentence for offences involving fraud.

Several proceedings between the two parties later, a judge of the Federal Circuit and Family Court’s division two dismissed an application for review of a decision of a registrar, who, in turn, dismissed an application to set aside a bankruptcy notice.

The allegations were included in the appeal with the Federal Court.

Justice Melissa Perry said not only were the Edmonds’ 10 grounds of appeal lengthy and lacking in clarity, but the submissions as part of them were “completely unfounded and should not have been made”.

VIEW ALL

During a June 2024 hearing, the Edmonds’ solicitor took the court to what he claimed was evidence to support some of the allegations, but Justice Perry said even those “rose no higher than to indicate the existence of a disagreement” between the parties.

“Nothing in those examples could conceivably have provided a basis for inferring a deliberate attempt to mislead the court in any respect or of other misconduct,” Justice Perry said.

Given the affidavits included “ill-founded” allegations against the lawyers, Justice Perry said they would be ruled inadmissible.

Later in the judgment, Justice Perry said the applicants were invited to withdraw the allegations, but they chose not to do so.

While Justice Perry said it was not appropriate to make any findings of misconduct against the Edmonds’ solicitor for his role in the allegations, she “nonetheless” pointed to rule 32.1 of the Legal Profession Uniform Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules.

That sets out that solicitors “must not make an allegation against another Australian legal practitioner of unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct unless the allegation is made bona fide and the solicitor believes on reasonable grounds that available material by which the allegation could be supported provides a proper basis for it”.

Justice Perry added she was concerned the solicitor claimed particular evidence before the primary judge was “ignored”.

The appeal, which alleged the primary judge erred in their decision, was dismissed because no ground was established.