Slater & Gordon accused of trying to snitch commercial benefit from Turner Freeman's High Court victory in asbestos case ... Angry rebuke ... All a terrible misunderstanding
Turner Freeman is awfully upset with Slater & Gordon.
And is it any wonder.
S & G issued a couple of press releases about the asbestos related case, Booth v Amaca Pty Ltd (one of the James Hardie related companies).
The most recent release from the publicly listed law shop was on December 14, the day the High Court upheld Booth's claim.
The court said that there was sufficient evidence to support a finding by the Dust Diseases Tribunal that brake linings containing asbestos, manufactured by the appellant, caused Mr Booth's malignant pleural mesothelioma.
Straight out of the blocks Slater & Gordon trumpeted to the world: "Landmark High Court win for asbestos victims."
See Slater & Gordon media release.
The only trouble was that Slater & Gordon didn't act for Booth.
Wade: ring Joanne for further commentThe press release was issued by S & G asbestos partner in Sydney, Joanne Wade, and the firm's PR man Michael Salmon.
It gave the distinct impression that this was one of Slater & Gordon's triumphs.
"A landmark decision handed down today by the High Court of Australia has sent the strongest message yet to the manufacturers of automative brake pads that their products have a direct link to the deadly asbestos disease, mesothelioma."
It went on to describe the history of the Booth case with added commentary about it from Joanne Wade.
There was also a marketing twist to it, because Wade was quoted in the media release saying:
"[The High Court] decision will provide a huge amount of relief to the possibly hundreds of mechanics and automotive workers who have contracted or may contract asbestos related diseases repairing brakes over the years."
All part of an enthusiastic attempt to whistle-up a bit of business.
Gardiman: lividTurner Freeman partner and dust diseases guru Armando Gardiman was livid. He wrote to Slater & Gordon accusing the firm of behaviour that was "disgraceful … distasteful ...deceitful [and] completely unjustifiable".
He had referred S & G's media release to senior counsel seeking advice whether any rules or regulations have been infringed. If so, he would consider sending a complaint to the Legal Services Commissioner.
Woof, woof.
"The obvious inference to the uninformed upon reading the release is that you claim credit for the case when it had nothing to do with your firm.
You misrepresent yourself as having been involved in the conduct of the case when you did not perform a single act concerned with the cause until it had been successfully concluded by the efforts of Turner Freeman."
There was mention of "drones" and "busy bees".
John Booth was represented at all times by Gerard McMahon, a partner at Turner Freeman's Newcastle office.
"For three years Gerard McMahon has devoted much of his professional life to the conduct of this litigation."
McMahon: carried the Booth caseGardiman claimed that Michael Salmon contacted media organisations "in order to promote the media release".
The biting remarks kept coming:
"Perhaps, now that you are a public company, you have ceased to understand the ethics and the integrity required of legal practitioners."
You can read Armando's letter here.
We approached Michael Salmon for a response. He said Slater & Gordon has a client dealing with the same issues as Mr Booth's litigation, and that "we offer comment on issues affecting our clients".
Later we heard that Slater & Gordon had written to Turner Freeman apologising for any "misunderstanding".