Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Posts tagged 'Lawyers'

Tag Archives: Lawyers

The case law of lawyers bills in England, India, Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong

For a very long time in Commonwealth legal systems, the legal profession has been regulated for the benefit of clients of lawyers and the public at large. Among other things, there has been a recognised public interest in protecting those liable to pay legal fees from overcharging by lawyers. One of those protections is and has been the legal requirement for a bill to be provided so that the client can seek advice on the fees and charges.

As a result, one of the many modern obligations that lawyers in English legal systems have to comply with in the course of legal practice is to provide clients and any other persons liable for their fees with proper bills before such persons can be liable for or sued for such fees.

Full story: https://sterlinglawqld.com/the-case-law-of-lawyers-bills-in-england-india-australia-singapore-and-hong-kong/

Christian Porter loses appeal from restraint on Sue Chrysanthou SC

Former Attorney General Christian Porter has lost his appeal of a restraint against Defamation specialist Sue Chrysanthou SC representing him in his claim against the ABC.

Justice Thawley had ruled that there was a potential conflict of interest and the integrity of the judicial process and the due administration of justice required Ms Chrysanthou to be restrained. Furthermore, whilst Ms Chrysanthou had given evidence she did not recall any confidential information and that she no longer had emails received in connection with the meeting, Justice Thawley held that:

“However recollections are liable to being revived and there is nevertheless a risk of subconscious use of confidential information”

Full story: https://sterlinglawqld.com/christian-porter-loses-appeal-from-restraint-on-sue-chrysanthou-sc/

British barrister beats woke Bar Standards Board

In 2021, British barrister Jon Holbrook was investigated by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) over a series of social-media posts. 17 were thrown out. It decided that one of the 18 tweets in question constituted a breach of professional conduct.

The tweet he got into trouble for was as follows:

“Free speech is dying and Islamists and other Muslims are playing a central role. Who will lead the struggle to reinstate free speech as the foundation of all other freedoms?”

The Bar Tribunals and Adjudication Service initially found that Holbrook had breached duty five of its handbook:

“you must not behave in a way which is likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in you or in the profession”.

Having already been thrown out of his chambers, he was sanctioned by the BSB and fined £500.

Holbrook appealed the decision on the following grounds:

1. under the Equality Act 2010 which protects ‘philosophical belief’
2. under the common law and human rights law that protects speech
3. because the charge of causing offence and possible hostility towards Muslims:
a) sets the bar far too low for bringing either me or the profession into disrepute
b) is not set out in the BSB Handbook, is ultra vires and is not prescribed by law
c) breached natural justice as I was given no chance to respond to this new charge
4. because the procedure breached my right to a fair trial under article 6 of the ECHR and common law.

The appeal panel decided that Holbrook’s tweet had not breached this duty, and ruled that the tweet was not “seriously offensive or seriously discreditable within the terms of the handbook guidance”.

Full story: https://sterlinglawqld.com/british-barrister-beats-woke-bar-standards-board/

Money Money Money

Victorian man Neville Austin, 44, is planning to launch Victoria’s first stolen generation claim.

His solicitors have briefed barrister Jack Rush QC, who was part of the legal team that won a $4 billion payout from James Hardie Industries for former workers exposed to lethal doses of asbestos.

But the head of Stolen Generations Victoria and Mr Austin’s cousin, Lyn Austin, said while she could not comment on Mr Austin’s case, dozens more were preparing similar claims.

“I cannot make comment on that case at all, but … I do know that there are another 30 or 40 that are going to be doing a civil action claim,” she told ABC Radio in Melbourne.

“They have a right to pursue a claim if they wish, they were removed through the policies that were upon them.”

Ms Austin said it was a person’s prerogative to take civil action if they wished.

“It should be left for the courts and people to have that choice and make a choice of whether they take a civil claim individually or class action,” she said.

Mr Austin’s writ is yet to be filed with the court and does not nominate a payout figure, but claimants in other states have won between $350,000 and $500,000.

Brisbane Times

Every flood begins with a trickle and as I predicted in an earlier post now that the apology has been made every chancer, encouraged by lawyers of the latte sipping variety, is thinking about the possibility of getting a bucket of money. and I expect that they will also be hoping that the tide of emotion that has warmed many a lefties heart will get them over the line when the evidence is absent that they were all removed for racist reasons.

Will this flood also be swelled by the men and women who,as children, were taken and adopted out just because their mothers were unmarried? Because that is actually a larger demographic than the “Stolen Generation”, and nearly all of those children were actually stolen from young women isolated and bullied into agreeing to adoption .

Cheers Comrades

😉

%d bloggers like this: