Wrong byline on Law Society prez's article in the Fin Review ... Seeking the "number one" barrister in the land ... Lionel Murphy's ALAO anniversary celebrated in enemy territory
"By John Dobson" - or someone else with expert knowledge
THAT was a peachy opinion piece in the Financial Review (July 9) by NSW Law Society president John Dobson.
See: Corporate liability is no longer limited
Dobbo bemoaned the stresses and strains faced by company directors - confusion about their duties, liabilities arising from aggrieved shareholders, the terrible cost of insurance, pesky Twitter users that spoil the controlled flow of [mis]information.
Dobs called for light-touch regulation, more limits to directors liability, clarity and "bold leadership".
It was a fascinating piece of opinionising by a sole practitioner from Miranda.
Move over Allens, move over Freehils, move over Mallesons - there's a new corporate guru on the block.
The Law Society even proudly Tweeted a message to its 1,827 followers:
Except that Dobson didn't write the article himself.
It was published by way of a curtain raiser to a debate about directors' duties as part of the Law 'n' Order Society's "Thought Leadership" business series.
The debate took place at 5pm tonight (July 16).
The society's official response to our inquiry about the true authorship of this submission to the newspaper said:
"As with any senior role, the Law Society president is supported by a number of advisors who have expert knowledge and who write speeches and author and place news articles on his behalf."
In this instance a byline that says "John Dobson" is a tiny bit misleading.
I see from Dobbo's bio that he is a member of the Legal Profession Admission Board and a former member of the Legal Qualifications and the Examinations Committee.
Would it be acceptable for law students to have their essays and exams ghost written? It presents an untidy problem.
On one view it's just as well he didn't write it, what with breezy expressions such as:
"This means we have to be aware of the unintended consequences of over-regulation."
and …
"Ironically, this suggests that social media itself has become an independent driver of corporate ethics and good governance, since everyone who matters will know if a director was part of a board that failed to properly discharge its duties."
Everyone who matters? So who doesn't matter?
* * *
STEP forward Allan Myers or Justin Gleeson (now that the whale trial at the ICJ in The Hague has fired its last harpoons).
This ad in Lawyers Weekly says someone called Alan is looking for you:
"I'm not looking for the number two or number nine but the number one barrister in Australia.
Someone who is motivated, a larrikin and a learned 'legal eagle' in many fields.
If you are the number one barrister, call Alan on 1300 1celebrity."
Allan call Alan.
* * *
Lionel Murphy: "storefront offices"AG Dreyfus QC is hosting a morning tea from 9-11am on July 31 in the library of the Supreme Court of Vic to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Australian Legal Aid Office.
However, so the event won't be swamped by the besandalled feet of the Community Legal Centres, or their clients, a full room quota of 50 has been invited with at least half-a-dozen worthies listed to speak.
The coffee will need to be strong.
The organisers have been culling lists of appropriate invitees, including individuals who have made significant contribution to the sector and "clients of note".
They will be having tea and cake with a bunch of judges, academics, private practitioners, public servants and pollies.
The location is slightly problematic.
Local benchers have been putting harpoons into legal aid for not stumping up enough money to properly fund those who loyally ply their trade for the accused and the dispossessed.
There is also the Lionel Murphy factor.
Murphy as attorney general, created the ALAO in 1973. He envisaged:
" … storefront offices [where] the ordinary man or woman faced with a legal problem will go as readily as he or she would with an ailing motor car."
See Ministerial Statement on Legal Aid
See David Neal SC's appreciation of Murphy
It was the Victorian bar and Victorian judges who went out of their way to express outrage at Murphy's appointment to the High Court in 1975.
Yet here they are toasting his creation in the very heart of the territory so stridently opposed to him.
During the ceremony an audio-visual display will be projected on the wall, showing the happy achievements of various legal assistance services.
Here are some examples ...