Unlawful Retaliatory Acts by the Law Society of NSW – How Lawyers Who Act Lawfully Can Be Stripped of Their Livelihood.
- Odtojan Bryl Lawyers
- Sep 25
- 6 min read
Updated: Oct 5
Unlawful Retaliatory Acts by the Law Society of NSW - Views of “Unfitness” Without Case or Process
1. The Core Facts
The Law Society of NSW, through its Professional Standards Department (PSD) and Council, had no case.
Instead of initiating proper proceedings under Chapter 5 of the Uniform Law, it invoked unfettered section 45 powers without lawful foundation.
It created an undisclosed internal process, and in doing so usurped the roles of NCAT and the courts.
By nothing more than email, PSD expressed its opinion that two lawyers with 18 years’ combined experience, with no breaches of law, ethics, or conduct, were “unfit to practise law."
2. Contradictions in Their Own Decisions
Decision 1, at paragraph 75 (MO), provides:
75. There is no dispute that, at the time of submitting the 2024/25 Renewal Application, there were no disciplinary findings of professional misconduct, or disciplinary action commenced against the Solicitor under the Uniform Law, which the Solicitor was required to disclose under any of the provisions of Rule 13…
Thus, by their own admission:
No disciplinary findings.
No disciplinary action.
Nothing that Rule 13 required to be disclosed.
3. When and How the Decisions Were Issued
Within 12 days of Ms Odtojan posting a YouTube video exposing what had happened.
After 10 months of being subjected to an undisclosed, shifting process controlled solely by PSD Director Valerie Griswold and Deputy Director Nadya Haddad.
During this time, the lawyers were kept in constant uncertainty, forced to practise on an “in force” expired certificate.
4. What Happened During This Period
Solicitors’ rights stripped away without notice.
Solicitors’ profiles/data disappeared from the Law Society Registry.
Narratives shifted:
misconduct as fact → “alleged prior misconduct” → “alleged prior conduct” → no misconduct at all → “non-disclosure of referrals” → adopting other solicitors’ NCAT/court cases.
Repeated correspondence ignored: requests for particulars, objections, fee receipts.
Practising certificates interfered with without lawful basis or notice.
Membership removed or not renewed despite payment.
5. Nature of the Decisions
Purported “Views of Unfitness” decisions were signed by Valerie Griswold, Director of Legal Regulation.
Based not on evidence or lawful process, but on mere commentary and untested opinions.
Created without notice, without due process, without lawful determination.
No proceedings. No case. Nothing proven.
6. Public Interest
This case exposes how NSW legal regulators have:
disregarded correspondence and statutory process;
usurped the role of NCAT and the courts;
issued outcomes serving their own ends rather than the law.
It stands as a warning for the profession: lawyers who act lawfully can be stripped of their livelihood without process. This requires urgent external action and reform to restore integrity and uphold the rule of law.
7. Documents for Public Record
DOCUMENTS
The Law Society of NSW's Views of Unfitness based on mere commentaries.
The following are the view of unfitness decisions by the Law Society of NSW signed by Ms Griswold. These decisions were created without any notice, without due process or lawful determination. There were no legal proceedings. Nothing proven just mere untested opinions not founded in law.
Attachment A1 Docs (provided for the first time at the time the decision emailed).
Law Society of NSW Letter Their opinion / views of unfitness, refusing the practising certificate of Marie ODTOJAN, emailed 30 May 2025
Attachment A1 Docs (provided for the first time at the time the decision was emailed).
Attachment A2 Docs (provided for the first time at the time the decision was emailed).
Events / Communications - undisclosed internal process conducted by Ms Griswold and Ms Haddad.
In 2024:
8 & 17 July - Ms Valerie Griswold's Letter to Mr Bryl / to Ms Valerie Griswold's Letter to Ms Odtojan
13 & 14 August - Mr Bryl Letter to Ms Griswold & PSD / Ms Odtojan Letter to Ms Griswold & PSD (No response to date from Ms Griswold / Law Society Council)
15 August - Bryl / Odtojan to Law Society Council, PSD and OLSC (No response to date from Law Society Council, PSD and OLSC).
Notices to Attorney General (& MP Hugh McDermott)
In 2025:
12 February - Bryl / Odtojan Letter to Law Society Head of Registry, Ms Nadya Haddad Seeking clarifications of memberships, PC, payments etc. (No response to date from Haddad / Law Society)
24 March - Ms Haddad Letter to Mr Bryl / Ms Haddad Letter to Ms Odtojan.
13 May - OBL / Odtojan email to LS Professional Standards Scheme (No response to date)
15 May - Bryl / Odtojan to Law Society PSD, Council and OLSC (No response to date from Haddad / Law Society PSD, Council and OLSC)
17 May - posted YouTube video of Ms Odtojan sharing what has occurred, being ignored and muted throughout the process, whilst rights are being stripped unlawfully, solicitor data disappearing and and more.
30 May 2025 - Letters by email s 45 documents views of unfitness (See above)
Events / Communications - After issued Decisions
Supreme Court Proceedings - Challenging the Legality of Decisions
Excerpts of Supreme Court Summons:
Excerpts of Law Society (Hickson Hunt & Hunt): Response:
31 July 2025 - Objections Letters to Law Society's (Hicksons, Hunt & Hunt) Response to summons:
1 August 2025 - Law Society's (Hicksons, Hunt & Hunt) response to objections:
10 September 2025 - Notice to Appointed Manager of Legal Practice - Christopher Nolan
Ms Griswold and Ms Haddad's Collateral Threats to the Supreme Court Summons
Through Baker McKenzie, Ms Haddad and Ms Griswold issued a Concerns Notice Threats, days after Law Society was served with Bryl and Odtojan summons, a total of 100 pages.
Bryl and Odtojan Responses to Baker Mckenzie / V. Griswold and N. Haddad Concern Notices Treats :
Ms Valerie Griswold's NSW Suspension Record & Consumer Alert
Ms Griswold’s Suspension Record and Consumer Alert in California
Ms Griswold through Baker Mckenzie told us she has no adverse record. The State Bar of California says otherwise.
On 11 July 2025, Ms Griswold, through Baker McKenzie, sent us a concerns notice in which she claimed:
“…in her long and distinguished career, Ms Griswold has not been the subject of any investigations, adverse findings, or disciplinary action.”
But according to the State Bar of California, Ms Griswold was suspended for non-payment of fees and a Consumer Alert was issued to warn the public she was not eligible to practise law.
Despite this record, Ms Griswold is promoted by the Law Society of NSW to present on legal ethics seminars, without disclosing her suspension record to the public or the profession in her advertised and published bio.
Every solicitor has a positive duty to disclose adverse records. A suspension is a show-cause event, particularly when the lawyer continues to present themselves in official Law Society events on “ethics” while simultaneously concealing their own record.
For more info, visit:
Disclaimer: This notice is a public interest disclosure, public awareness, and education. Based on the lived experience of lawyers Marie Odtojan and Artem Bryl, witnesses, victims, and whistleblowers who acted lawfully. This post is subject to change where corrections, amendments, or additional information may be required. For queries, please contact: oblawyers.media@gmail.com
Comments