Login
Lawyer’s demand for recusal of tribunal member refused
A Victorian lawyer once accused of posting the number of a junior solicitor in a sex work advertisement alleged the member overseeing recent disciplinary action was biased and demanded he be recused.
Naomi Neilson
Nickita Evgenevich Knight failed to have Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) member Neill Campbell recused from a matter brought by the Victorian Legal Services Board (VLSB) about conduct alleged to have occurred between 2017 and 2019.
VCAT noted Knight pleaded guilty to the charge and admitted all particulars, bar one, in a joint statement of agreed and disputed facts.
Campbell made orders for the parties to serve applications or written submissions about this issue, but Knight objected to this and sought an order for Campbell to be recused for apprehended or actual bias.
One of Knight’s major concerns was that Campbell’s order was made on 27 May but was not given to the parties until 6 June.
In his VCAT submissions, Knight said this delay denied both parties the “sufficient time to prepare and respond effectively”.
He added the decision to invite further submissions after the matter closed “suggests a lack of finality and raises concerns about impartiality”.
“This conduct could be seen as favouring the applicant and demonstrating potential bias, undermining the fairness of the proceedings,” Knight said.
In response, VLSB said it was the only party affected by the delayed orders because the respondent still had the required seven days to make his defence submissions in reply.
“The respondent suffered no practical detriment whatsoever.
“Further and alternatively, even if the respondent had been denied procedural fairness, it would not follow that this would justify a finding of apprehended bias,” VLSB said.
Campbell said that when a tribunal or court notices a matter has not been addressed by the parties, it can invite them to make further submissions after its decision was reserved.
He added there was no request for an extension.
“A reasonable member of the public who is properly informed would understand that if the parties have not addressed the tribunal on an important matter in the hearing, they may be invited to do so in writing at a later time,” Campbell said.
“They would also be informed that this does occur from time to time and is not unorthodox or contrary to established legal practice.
“They would understand that such action is not an indication of bias by the tribunal member.”
Campbell refused to recuse himself but did extend the deadlines for both parties to make any further submissions.
In a separate matter back in 2022, Knight reportedly appealed a decision of the VLSB to refuse to renew his practising certificate.
In a judgment by member Elisabeth Wentworth, dated January 2022, Knight was accused of posting the personal phone number of a junior solicitor online with an advertisement for sex work after she resigned.
The solicitor alleged she received several calls.
More to come.
Naomi Neilson
Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly.
You can email Naomi at:
