Month: October 2008

(Songs about trials, part 2)  If I told you the precise location within the third great arm of government of the individual who nominated Pink Floyd’s ‘The Trial’, a segment from the filmic rock opera The Wall, you wouldn’t believe me.  More of his rich collection of songs about trials to come.

You wouldn’t know it from the comments but there is quite a flutter as various music buffs email me their lists, and then email me begging to know what others have enumerated.  This is just the beginnings, peoples.  All will be revealed in time.

httpv://au.youtube.com/watch?v=FCMHmDnfD6I

An extract from the lyrics: Continue reading “Anti-establishment propaganda enjoyed within highest office”

Part 1 in a new series: Songs About Trials (leave your favourites in the comments please).  First up, Bob Dylan’s ‘The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll‘ from ‘The Times They Are A-Changin’.  Seems Dylan is in fact a rich source of trial songs.

‘William Zanzinger killed poor Hattie Carroll
With a cane that he twirled around his diamond ring finger
At a Baltimore hotel society gath’rin’.
And the cops were called in and his weapon took from him
As they rode him in custody down to the station
And booked William Zanzinger for first-degree murder.
But you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears,
Take the rag away from your face.
Now ain’t the time for your tears. Continue reading “Songs about trials: part 1”

It’s all happening down at VCAT.  I reported on Michael Brereton’s disciplinary trial in absentia and the finding that the charges were made out here.  Now, Deputy President Dwyer has handed down his tribunal’s orders with reasons: Legal Services Commissioner v Brereton [2008] VCAT 273. Mr Brereton did not have a practising certificate at the time of the trial, not having applied for the renewal of his old one, so cancelling his practising certificate was not an option.  The only orders the Tribunal made were orders banning Mr Brereton from applying for a practising certificate for 5 years, and telling him not to even think about applying for trust money rights until mid-2018, when he will be 62. After 5 years, he can apply for a practising certificate, but the legal regulator will have to be satisfied that he is a fit and proper person to hold a practising certificate at that time. He was ordered to pay costs of $145,000.  Below, I comment on three aspects of the case: costs, the openness with which the analogy with criminal sentencing is embraced, and defects in the presentation of character evidence. Meanwhile, here’s an article from April on Operation Wickenby, an investigation into Mr Brereton amongst others, which I missed. Continue reading “Michael Brereton banned for 5 years and to pay $145,000 in costs”

Following on from my post about a book by a Melbourne lawyer about a big Melbourne trial, here’s a novel by a Melbourne doctor about a Melbourne GP’s experience of a medical negligence suit.  The Monthly says it’s good, and so it appears does Readings.  It’s published by Scribe.

I have spared you the endless articles on the glacial progress towards national uniformity.  Quite a long time ago now, upon the release of the Sallman Report which gave rise eventually to the Legal Profession Bill, I had lunch with the Legal Ombudsman and she predicted that it would be some time yet before any new law would come into force.  And so it was — years. The Legal Profession Act, 2004‘s commencement was only just achieved in 2005.  But now the buzz about needing to do something about the harmonisation which got derailed has ramped up.  People are talking about rewriting the whole thing and using raw power to make the states pass the same laws.  People like the Attorney-General. Continue reading “That dang national model law on the legal profession”

On 25 July 2008, the Supreme Court’s newish Taxing Master Wood decided a question about the transitional effect of amendments to the provisions about lawyer-client taxations (now called ‘reviews’) under the Legal Profession Act, 2004.  The decision is Law Institute of Victoria v RK.  In relation to such taxations of costs, the Act was amended in important ways on 9 May 2007.  In this particular case, the facts were that the costs agreement predated the amendments, as did the doing of the work, but the giving of the bill and the application for taxation post-dated them.  Master Wood decided that the amended Act would govern all lawyer-client taxations held after the amendments took effect, including this one.  He expressed his distaste for the Law Institute’s opportunistic attempt to wriggle out of a costs agreement it had negotiated with a lawyer, describing its behaviour as ‘unjust’. Continue reading “All taxations after 9 May 2007 are conducted under the amended Legal Profession Act, 2004”

A costs judge of the English High Court handed down a decision about the recoverability in insurance litigation of insurance loss adjusters’ fees.  An interesting article from CMS Cameron McKenna about the case is reproduced below. In an effort to find a link to an online version of the case, I found this webpage of Paramount Costs Consultants, with notes about English cases about costs. Here’s the article in full: Continue reading “Costs of insurance loss adjusters”