The committee also appealed the penalty Davidson received from the tribunal on the grounds it was "manifestly inadequate".
It sought an order suspending Davidson as a lawyer and/or a fine.
One of Davidson's arguments during the appeal was that the tribunal had relied on matters outside the circumstances of his conviction in its decision.
Justice Brendan Brown, who considered the arguments, dismissed Davidson's appeal.
"Consequently on the basis of my own consideration of the matter I consider that Mr Davidson's conviction on the 10 charges in question, given the offending which gave rise to the charges, the likely and actual consequences of the offending and the prominence of his legal experience in his profile as director and chairman, result in the convictions tending to bring the legal profession into disrepute," the judge said in his decision last month.
Justice Brown also dismissed the standard committee appeal on the tribunal's ruling that the convictions reflected on Davidson's fitness to practise as a lawyer.
However, he allowed the committee's appeal on Davidson's penalty.
"In all the circumstances of this case I do not consider that a censure was a sufficient penalty so as to maintain the public's confidence in the profession's discharge of its obligation to discipline its members...I do not view the present case as one where an order less than suspension should be entertained," he said.
While the standards committee pushed for 12-month suspension, Justice Brown said a period of nine months was sufficient.
The suspension begins from today, a spokesperson for the Law Society confirmed this morning.