Law Society of NSW unlawfully prevents the legitimate renewal of Ms Odtojan and Mr Bryl's practising certificates without lawful process and deleted their solicitors records in the LS Registry. An alleged targeted discriminatory hate crime in progress by the Law Society of NSW

The Most Honest Test Anyone can Apply "Take the process applied to two lawyers. Turn it around. Apply it to the people who applied it. Ask: would that be acceptable? This is the mirror test, and the reflection is revealing. There is a test that can cut through every legal argument, every procedural justification, and every institutional defence faster than any case authority. It is called the mirror test.

One Year On. No Findings. No Adjudication. Just Allegations, and a Judgment That Made It Precedent for Every Australian Lawyer. Marie Odtojan and Artem Bryl - Odtojan Bryl Lawyers. Two lawyers. A Law Firm. No findings. No proven case of any breaches under the law. No adjudication. Still speaking. Still fighting for the rule of law and democracy.

When a NSW Supreme Court Judge Is Sued, It Highlights a Fundamental Principle: No One Is Above the Law.

What This Public Disclosure is About This article concerns what we allege is the weaponisation of unresolved allegations to strip two lawyers of their livelihood, practising rights, and professional standing despite there being: * no findings of misconduct or unsatisfactory professional conduct; * no NCAT proceedings; * no suspension; * no tribunal determination; * and no adjudicated findings of wrongdoing by any court or tribunal. It concerns what we allege was a gross mi

This short video shows how 12 grounds in our judicial review proceedings were conceptualised into a single question in the judgment of Acting Justice Griffiths of the NSW Supreme Court (a similar approach appears in Mr Bryl’s judgment). That question does not reflect any of our pleaded grounds. It was never raised by either party, never argued, and never ventilated. Yet, it appears as the central framing of the judgment.

NSW Supreme Court Judicial Review Update. Odtojan and Bryl Two Australian lawyers and their law firm rendered “unfit” without any disciplinary proceedings, without NCAT determination, and without an independent decision-maker. Allegations and conduct issues were raised and determined by the same regulatory bodies, Law Society of NSW contrary to the disciplinary framework mandated by the Legal Profession Uniform Law. Raises serious concerns about due process, procedural fairne

A formal notice was submitted to the Office of Premier of NSW, Chris Minns, raising serious concerns about alleged unlawful and corrupt conduct by legal regulatory and public officials in New South Wales. These allegations point to systemic failures within key regulatory bodies overseeing the legal profession, including the Law Society of NSW's Professional Standards Department (PSD) and Council, and the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner (OLSC).

Odtojan & Bryl's Judicial Review Court Case: A Summary of Grounds & Submissions. Access to court submissions plays a crucial role in ensuring transparency and fairness in the legal process. Currently, the judicial review judgments are reserved. These proceedings were heard on 26 (Bryl) and 27 (Odtojan) November 2025 at the Supreme Court of NSW before the presiding acting Judge Griffiths. For those interested & following this case, this article provides the Plaintiffs' ground

Piper Alderman: A Portrait with Contradictions. An image speaks volumes about the contradictions within the legal profession. Andrea Beatty, partner Piper Alderman since 2018, " is widely published and her authorships include the leading consumer law text Annotated National Credit Code (LexisNexis)" whilst the same firm assist Credit Corp to record fictitious credit contracts in its claims, perverting the Credit Laws. Natalie Miller impersonated solicitor whilst unqualified