Search Archive
Free Newsletter sign-up
Search Justinian
Justinian's news stories

Innovations in fee collection ... Barrister lightly spanked for sending disturbing fee threat to former clients ... "See what happens if you don't pay your bills" ... File leverage ... Agreement not to complain in exchange for the file ... NCAT bares its gums ... Read more ... 


Justinian Columnists

Do nothing in the new utopia ... Policy vacuums ... Private sector leaders are filling voids created by sleepwalking politicians ... Voice to parliament and global warming left in the cold - which, somehow, gets us to the casualisation of the workforce, particularly at universities ... Fly-in, fly-out law school lecturers ... Full Federal Court wrestles with a "casual employee" ... Read more ... 


Justinian's Tweets


 

 

This form does not yet contain any fields.

    "I am really and truly pleased that I have been vindicated and that the court has preserved the presumption of innocence."   

    Tom Domican, "colourful" Sydney identity, who provided security services to a Kings Cross drug dealer, after settling for $100,000 his defamation case against nightclub entrepreneur John Ibrahim and Pan Macmillan. September 13, 2019 ... Read more flatulence ... 


    Justinian Featurettes

    David Hunt remembered ... Former NSW defamation judge and chief judge at common law ...The List with Socratic case management ... Defamation exotica ... Refinement of pleadings, perhaps over-refinement ... Prodigious worker ... International criminal law ... Tributes from Graham Hryce, David Rolph, Justice Mark Ierace and Judge Judith Gibson ... Read more ... 


    Justinian's archive

    Sentencing terror ... Fabulous sentencing transcript from County Court, Victoria ... Judge James Montgomery and counsel wrestle with the dates and the years ... Pythonesque proceedings ... Court reporter struggles to keep up ... Tears to the eyes ... From the archive, June 2012 ... Read more ... 


     

     

    « Brisbane notebook | Main | Frontline reports »
    Friday
    Aug012014

    Picking a small bone

    Barrister's silk application arrives 12 minutes after deadline ... Told by bar executive director that it will not be considered ... No "special circumstances" ... Correspondence ... Lawyers at ten paces  

    David Smallbone, a "history of frustration"

    SYDNEY barrister David Smallbone was 12 minutes late in lodging his ninth application for silk. 

    Bar executive director Philip Selth returned his application and said it would not be considered as it was not accompanied by an explanation of the "special circumstances" that caused it to arrive after deadline. 

    The thwarted brief is consulting his lawyers. 

    After receiving Selth's knock-back on July 28 Smallbone wrote to the president and councillors of the bar association requesting his application be accepted under clause 17 of the silk selection protocol.  

    He explained that he was in court till about three o'clock on the day of the deadline (5pm, July 25) and was "perforce required to settle the details of my application in a great rush. This led to the application being hand delivered 12 minutes late". 

    Selth wrote back next day saying that Smallbone had not provided any special circumstances, so tough luck. 

    "I note that another late application will also not be considered. The deadline was widely advertised to the bar. The fact that this is apparently your ninth application and that you say there is a 'history of frustration' does not justify you receiving more favourable consideration than other applicants." 

    By letter dated July 29 Smallbone asked Selth to advise who instructed him not to accept his application. 

    By another letter the same day, Smallbone re-submitted his application, insisting that it be referred to the bar council for urgent consideration. 

    He added: "You will be hearing soon from my solicitor." 

    The most recent missive from Selth was on July 30. 

    "As I advised yesterday, clause 17 of the senior counsel protocol refers specifically to the president having the discretion as to whether late applications should be considered. This is not a matter for the bar council ... I return your application." 

    In 2011 Smallbone succeeded in a Federal Court application to have the bar provide silk applicants with the comments made about them by the members of the consultation group, as long as the names of individuals were redacted.  

    Importantly, Smallbone also won a stay of the bar's decision about his application until he had an opportunity to respond to the comments. 

    Nonetheless to say, he remained in the salon de refuses. 

    His contention now is that the bar council has ultimate responsibility over the process, despite the delegation of its power in this instance to the president and a silk selection committee. 

    You can read the action-packed correspondence here ...  

    Selth to Smallbone, July 28

    Smallbone to president and councillors, July 28 

    Selth to Smallbone, July 29

    Smallbone to Selth #1, July 29

    Smallbone to Selth #2, July 29 

    Selth to Smallbone, July 30 

    Reader Comments

    There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.
    Editor Permission Required
    You must have editing permission for this entry in order to post comments.