LCRO 95/2023 JV v FA (8 October 2024) [pdf, 177 KB]
...[19] Dr JV’s submissions were supported by Mr XW, Dr JV’s supervising partner. It was Mr XW’s view that Dr JV was a practitioner who was assiduously attentive to his obligation to preserve client confidentiality. [20] Further submissions filed by Mr FA (5 September 2022, 6 December 2022, 14 February 2023 and 17 April 2023) reinforced his view that: (a) he had not been informed of likely disbursement costs; and (b) Dr JV had failed to protect his privacy; and 6 (c) Dr JV w...