The order comes just months after Justices Mark Leeming and Jeremy Kirk made their own referral to the LSC based on allegations the couple – who practice under Odtojan Bryl Lawyers – made against two barristers “without any proper basis”.

While representing his wife, Mr Bryl alleged to Justices White and Basten that solicitor Thomas Glynn and barrister Nicholas Ford wanted to “obtain a judgment from the Local Court against [Ms Odtojan] for the debt claimed by Credit Corp Services (CCS)”.

When asked what the basis for the allegation was, Mr Bryl claimed it was due to their “conduct in court, from their treatment of the documents, from their tampering with the evidence, from filing the statement of facts and issues where dates are edited …”.

Mr Bryl was then reminded of his obligations as a legal professional to not make “such serious allegations” unless there is a proper basis.

In response, Mr Bryl said he stood by the claims.

The recent order giving the couple 14 days to show cause related to an appeal brought by Ms Odtojan against a District Court order to strike out her statement of claim with limited leave to replead.

In the claim, Ms Odtojan made sensational claims against Mr Glynn and Mr Ford, who had been retained to defend her in Local Court proceedings brought by CCS for a $45,299.75 credit card debt.

VIEW ALL

In 2022, Ms Odtojan commenced separate proceedings against them on claims they conspired with each other and with lawyers for CCS to obtain judgments against her using fraud and collusion.

Some of the allegations included claims they “fabricated court documents” with the CCS lawyers and then relied upon them “to fraudulently create false material facts at the final hearing with intent to omit and circumvent material facts”.

Ms Odtojan also alleged they suppressed a “central issue” before the Local Court in the credit card proceedings, being that because of non-compliance with the credit laws, there was no credit contract to enforce.

As for Mr Ford specifically, Ms Odtojan alleges that because Mr Ford referred to documents CCS claimed to be contracted documents – and which were identified to be contract documents by the Local Court magistrate – as the contract documents, this was “evidence of fraud”.

“That allegation is self-evidently baseless and improper,” Justices White and Basten determined.

In February 2023, District Court Judge Sharron Norton made an order to strike out Ms Odtojan’s statement of claim but granted her leave to replead allegations relating to advice on the merits of an appeal of the credit card proceedings to the Supreme Court.

Ms Odtojan claimed she was denied procedural fairness and submitted her case “was not heard before the court”. Justices White and Basten dismissed this, as the “transcript shows the contrary”.

Justices White and Basten added that if it were shown there was an “arguable basis” for the allegations of collusion and fraud, they would accept the claim should proceed to trial.

“But there is not a skerrick of evidence to support the premise.

“We have been provided with the judgments and pleadings in the Local Court and the full transcript of the hearing.

“There is nothing in them that provides any basis for the allegations of collusion between CCS or its lawyers, and the lawyers for Ms Odtojan. To the contrary, the case was hard fought on what counsel perceived to be the issues for trial,” the judgment read.

Leave to appeal was refused.