Sideris, George

JurisdictionAustralia — New South Wales

BodyOffice of the Legal Services Commissioner (NSW) (OLSC)

Professionsolicitor

Date19-Feb-2024

HearingCouncil of the Law Society of New South Wales

OutcomeCancellation of Practising Certificate Cancellation of the Lawyer’s suspended practising certificate for the year ending 30 June 2024 (under s 82(1)(d) of the Uniform Law) and restriction imposed on the Lawyer on making further applications for a practising certificate for a period of 5 years (pursuant to s 94 of the Uniform Law). $0.00 About About the OLSC The Commissioner History Mission statement Structure Contact Contact the OLSC Give us your feedback: online surveys Access to information (GIPAA) Community information Information for lawyers Fact sheets FAQs Other regulatory and complaint-handling organisations Contact LawAccess NSW for legal information " You and Your Lawyer", Hot Topics 78 Legal Information Access Centre (LIAC), State Library of NSW , provides access to information about the law in NSW regarding your lawyer Privacy Copyright and Disclaimer Website accessibility

Allegation / charges

(1) The Lawyer is unable to fulfil the inherent requirements of an Australian legal practitioner as he does not have the ability to comply with the law in relation to his entitlement to engage in legal practice, contrary to his fundamental duty to the court and the administration of justice. (2) The Lawyer is unable to fulfil the inherent requirements of an Australian legal practitioner as he does not have the ability to discharge his duty to be honest and courteous in all dealings in the course of legal practice, including his dealings with the designated local regulatory authority. (3) The Lawyer is unable to fulfil the inherent requirements of an Australian legal practitioner as he does not have the ability to discharge his duty not to engage in conduct which is likely to a material degree to be prejudicial to, or diminish confidence in, the administration of justice. (4) The Lawyer is unable to fulfil the inherent requirements of an Australian legal practitioner as he does not have the ability to discharge his duty not to engage in conduct which is likely to a material degree to bring the profession into disrepute.

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

SanctionOther

Dishonesty foundNo

The provided text sets out four findings that the Lawyer is unable to fulfil the inherent requirements of an Australian legal practitioner, relating to compliance with the law, honesty and courtesy, the administration of justice, and the reputation of the profession. No express finding of dishonesty is made, and no sanction or costs figures are stated in this excerpt.

Duties found breached:

⚠ figures not found verbatim in the source were dropped: ["extracted_from_register_summary"]

Duties engaged

Other decisions involving this respondent

[2025] NSWCA 159 2025-07-18 · OLSC · Australia — New South Wales · Costs Removal of lawyer’s name from the Roll of Australian …
[2024] NSWCATOD 3 2024-01-05 · OLSC · Australia — New South Wales · Costs Order recommending removal of lawyer's name from the …
Decision 2022-10-20 · OLSC · Australia — New South Wales · Suspension of Practising Certificate for the year ending 30…

Matched by respondent name — may include a different person with the same name.

Documents

No documents recorded.

Source: https://portal.olsc.nsw.gov.au/dasearchbn/daresultdetail?id=a9e4f39c-0619-4f89-9999-2a0909a0728e