Chief Justice Andrew Bell ... Urging an end to remoteness ... At loggerheads with Victorian counterpart ... Profession in peril ... Conviviality is king ... Trouble padding-up ... Max Shanahan reports
Bell CJ: keen to rekindle the dynamic exchange
Chief Justice Andrew Bell - the so-called "Chairman of Fun" - returned to Sydney Law School recently for its "Distinguished Alumni" talk series.
A barrel of laughs it certainly was not - the legal profession clearly has a different standard for "fun" - but the audience of bald lawyers and soon-to-be-bald law students nonetheless lapped-up His Honour's ruminations on work ethic, private international law, and collegiality in the profession.
Bell's thoughts on his academic speciality of private international law ("fascinating ... great fun") triggered unpleasant memories for this traumatised student, while his tales of 7am-2am work days left one with a deep sense of fear.
Some exclusive insights - "I don't miss the bar" and "I really enjoy being a judge" – kept the talk flowing, but it was the concept of collegiality which most enamoured Bell, as he waded into the contention over remote work and live hearings, post-COVID.
Bell's vociferous support for a return to the office – "remote is a pejorative word for a reason" – stands in direct contradiction to the views of his Victorian counterpart.
Last month, Victorian Chief Justice Anne Ferguson lauded the benefits of new technology in a speech to the Australian Bar Association:
"The accelerated developments in technology have made it far easier for people from suburban and regional areas, interstate or overseas to participate in hearings whether as lawyers, parties or witnesses.
There are benefits for lawyers, but more importantly there are benefits for your clients and the community. Reducing the costs of litigation and improving the efficiency and effectiveness of court processes improves access to justice."
For Bell, the concern was not with issues of access or productivity, but rather a desire to preserve the "dynamic exchange" between barristers and the bench, and among the profession at large.
Indeed, the CJ noted that some judges - unnamed - felt greatly inhibited in asking questions during remote hearings; not a great sign for the administration of justice.
But the overwhelming concern - and one echoed by his former fellow office night owl Stephen Gageler - was with the impact of remote work and hearings on the collegiality of the profession.
"If it all becomes atomised and remote, the whole notion of a profession will break down."
The loss of the "subtle but important diversions" from a singular focus on work under a remote regime was the subject of Bell's ire - lamenting the loss of casual interaction and mentorship between the profession's junior and senior members, and the convivial way in which one finds their feet at the bar.
"When people work together it makes the environment of the workplace better if people are collegiate in the sense that they genuinely know and like the people that they work with, and they will take an interest in what each other is doing. That is very important in terms of supporting each other [in the profession]."
Bell was keen to liken his vision of collegiality to his experiences as a university cricketer:
"You learn how people react to adversity, you learn about supporting each other, you celebrate each other's successes, and you enjoy each other's company."
Indeed, if the NSW legal profession under Bell is anything like his cricketing days, then the "Chairman of Fun" moniker is appropriate.
From the 1987/88 Sydney University Cricket Club annual report:
"Andrew Bell is a steady performer, and is known, on occasions, to have a dram on Friday night to steady his nerves for the game on Saturday. Indeed, there were times during the season when his nerves were so steady, he seemed to be having trouble putting on his pads."