Search
This area does not yet contain any content.
Justinian News

 

Politics Media Law Society


The rotten fruit issue ... Corruption busters busted for bias, concealment, and conflicts … Mistress of the office couch more damaged than the rape victim … Next round for Linda Reynolds … Reputation damaged by former attorney general … Miranda Devine smooches Trump ... Read on >> 

What's Going to Happen to the Tots

Free Newsletter
Justinian Columnists

From the cutting room floor...Handsy Heydon goes to Perth ... Celebrity tour ... Conferenceville ... Dicey's job application speech from 2002 ... Other High Court judges mocked as "vegetables" ... Mason CJ ridiculed ... Speech bowdlerised for public consumption ... Courage of conviction MIA ... From our National Affairs Correspondent ... Read more >> 

Blow the whistle

 

News snips ...


Pinning the tail on the jellyfish ... Auditor General to probe the shifting expenditure on Federal Court legal services ... AFR ... More >>

Justinian's Bloggers

Letter from London ... Weather report ... Starmer sinking ... Farage rising ... Fake law firm ... Fake cases ...  NHS employee cleans up with woke case for hurt feelings ... Floyd Alexander-Hunt files from Blighty ... Read more >> 

"And I want to just thank everybody and in particular, God, I want to just say we love you, God, and we love our great military, protect them. God bless the Middle East. God bless Israel, and God bless America. Thank you very much. Thank you." 

Donald Trump at the White House announcing the bombing of Iran ... June 21, 2025 ... Read more flatulence ... 


Justinian Featurettes

Holding onto Hope ... Gina Rinehart's Bleak House ... Seeking chunks of the huge iron ore pit, Hope Downs ... Tracing the tangled Wright, Hancock, Rinehart litigation ... Allegations of fraud against the family trust ...Manoeuvring ... Tax "advice" ... Shifting vesting date ... Money, the root of unhappiness ... Anthony-James Kanaan reports ... Read more >> 


Justinian's archive

The High Court of Queensland ... Where to now for Bookshelves Brandis? ... Banana Benders in charge ... Eleven names scratched by CJ from Sunshine silks list ... Prosecutors dominate NSW Dizzo appointments ... Farewell to Equity Queen ... What life looked like nine years ago ... From Justinian's Archive, December 2, 2016 ... Read more >> 


 

 

« Killing the goose | Main | The short goodbye »
Monday
Jan242011

The dash to mediocrity

Law Council fails to justify ethically flawed solicitors' conduct rules ... Law Society of New South Wales covers the problem in waffle ... Theodora on the barricades about conflicts and client "consent"

The Law Council of Australia didn't try very hard to come up with an imaginative response to my editor's story about the flawed solicitors' conduct rules.

The story was here in Justinian and here in The Sydney Morning Herald

The two most objectionable rules singled out for criticism both relate to watering down the information to be given clients about a solicitor's potential conflicts.

See the new conduct rules HERE.

Rule 11 will allow solicitors to rely on "implied consent" when concurrently acting for two clients whose interests are "adverse".

For instance, if the information about the conflict is buried in a detailed retainer agreement that would be sufficient to establish "consent".

Rule 12 permits solicitors to accept referral fees if they have "informed consent". The problem is they don't have to inform the client how much they are trousering.

These two rules alone represent a lowering of fiduciary standards, dressed up as "consumer protection".

While the rules seek to protect solicitors from ethical complaints, it opens lawyers to civil actions for breach of duty.

The editor's outpouring included a swipe at the Chief Justices, who should have put a stop to this proposed lax regime, which we understand was supported and driven by the LCA's Large Law Firm Group.

The lame rebuttal from the new president of the LCA, Alex Ward, majestically avoided addressing the central allegations.

Instead, he fearlessly denied something than had not been asserted.

"It is incorrect to assert or imply that the Chief Justices of this country had any part to play in the creation or approval of, the Australian Solicitors' Conduct Rules.

To suggest otherwise is mischievous and unhelpful in any rational debate on the appropriateness or otherwise of the content of the rules...

The Law Council welcomes informed comment on the contents of these rules, but to imply that the Law Council process was unduly influenced by one of its constituencies, or anyone else, is wrong."

There was no attempt to justify the vice at the heart of the issue.

As they stand, these rules, with their half-baked disclosure requirements, represent a dash to mediocrity.

The Law Society of New South Wales also skirted the issue. Asked about this dilution of fiduciary responsibility back came an artfully crafted PR response:

"The Law Society of New South Wales supports uniform national conduct rules for solicitors and has been closely engaged in the development process of the Australian Solicitors Conduct Rules. This has included making suggestions about the content and drafting of a number of the proposed rules... The Law Society always welcomes submissions on proposed new rules in response to this [consultation] process. The Law Society Council will consider the Australian Solicitors Conduct Rules in their final form, and their adoption in NSW, in the coming months."

It is understood that Western Australia and South Australia are not supportive of the rules as they stand.

We may end-up with a national profession without unified rules.

Let's hope that the AGs and the CJs wise up to what's happening and do something...

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.
Member Account Required
You must have a member account on this website in order to post comments. Log in to your account to enable posting.