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

Potty Mouth Solicitor Dispatched ... NSW Court of Appeal takes dim view of solicitor who laced his correspondence with disrespectful insults ... Insufficiently professional ... Arrived from Greece with only his underpants ... No contrition ... Anthony Kanaan files ... Read more >>

Politics Media Law Society


The End Of The Affair ... Lord Moloch’s bid for more Fox News fans … The Wall Street Journal rallies the MAGA base …Will the old rogue abandon his journalists? … Is “bawdy” the right word here? … The Deep State plumbs the depths … John and Stanley Roth’s generosity to loving causes ... Read on >> 

Free Newsletter
Justinian Columnists

Suing for defamation - it's such a good idea ...Federal Court of Australia ... Sydney barrister loses bid for extension of time to bring appeal over decision allowing Giles George to intervene to seek an equitable lien over costs ... Falling out between barrister and firm after successful defamation action ... No error or procedural unfairness ... From Stephen Murray at the Gazette of Law & Journalism ... Read more >> 

Blow the whistle

 

News snips ...


Review of the operation of the FCFCA ... No suggestion that the courts should be subsumed by the Federal Court of Australia ... Instead, it's largely not understood that the FCFC consists of two separate courts ... "Unfortunate nicknames" ... Consideration of name change urged, along with further review of the federal law jurisdiction ... On it goes ... Report >>

Justinian's Bloggers

Postcard from London ... Summertime - And the living' is easy ... Votes for 16-year olds ... Paralegal's theft by pen ... Spy helping British intelligence from his job at Border Force ... Super-injunction comes out of the shadows ... Feed them strawberries and cream ... Floyd Alexander-Hunt files from Blighty ... Read more >> 

"I've stopped six wars in the last - I'm averaging about a war a month. But the last three were very close together. India and Pakistan, and a lot of them. Congo was just and Rwanda was just done, but you probably know I won't go into it very much, because I don't know the final numbers yet. I don't know. Numerous people were killed, and I was dealing with two countries that we get along with very well, very different countries from certain standpoints. They've been fighting for 500 years, intermittently, and we solved that war. You probably saw it just came out over the wire, so we solved it ..."

President Donald Trump at a meeting in Scotland with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer ... July 28, 2025 ... Read more flatulence ... 


Justinian Featurettes

Home Duties ... The dumping of Attorney General Mark Dreyfus ... Behind the scenes ... Bastardry among the brothers ... Unfinished business ... Family law, privacy ... Considerable policy and legislative results ... Here's Michelle Rowland as AG ... What are her priors? ... Polly Peck reports from the Gallery ... Read more >> 


Justinian's archive

Abolish silks ... Sydney SC writes to the editor calling for abolition of the silk system ... Appointments are anachronistic ... It's not a matter of ability, only notability ... Secret blackballing ... "Corrupt" process ... Confessions from an insider who played the game ... From Justinian's Archive, October 24, 2002 ... Read more >> 


 

 

« Boxing beats scholarship | Main | I'm a loser »
Wednesday
Jul102013

Untrustworthy opponents

Treachery among learned friends ... Being double-crossed by one's own ... Junior Junior would rather play fair and lose the case, than foul and win it ... How honourable can you get? 

IT is said that the Bar is an honourable profession.

Us barristers are, arguably, held by the courts to an even higher standard than solicitors.

I don't know whether that is true, or just something they tell you in the bar course to make sure you do the profession proud when you are plying your business in the real world.

In any event, I do truly believe that honesty and integrity must underlie my work if for no other reason than it means my opponents in court can trust my word.

Acting against a trustworthy opponent is wonderful.

You know you can trust them to mention the matter on your behalf, by consent, when you are stuck elsewhere, or to let the court know you are there when you have stepped out briefly and your matter has been called.

Very best of all, you know that when you are working out the issues in dispute, there will be no surprise arguments on the day.

Unfortunately, I have twice appeared against untrustworthy opponents.

The first time my shock was so great, I was dumbfounded. Instead of leaping up and screaming, "Liar! You swore you wouldn't raise that," I sat in my seat stunned. 

In this particular case it was a police prosecutor - I will remember this person for the rest of my career and will not hesitate to explain to anyone dealing with them to watch out.

It's not the sort of reputation I expect anyone wants to cultivate, but you reap what you sow.

The second time I was a victim of treachery, it was still a shocking experience - but I had the presence of mind to do something about it. 

It was a more senior practitioner than myself and after agreeing issues in dispute, I was very surprised to hear him start an argument in his closing about a particular aspect that he had told me I could leave out of the "issues in dispute" document for the judge, as it wasn't in dispute. 

Luckily, after his closing - including the offending argument - I was able to respond, very coyly mentioning that my learned friend has previously agreed that that particular issue was not one in dispute.

However, having been burned previously, despite being advised the issue would not be raised, I had not cut the arguments from my personal submissions so I was able to deal with this curveball on the fly.

Afterwards, I didn't know whether to mention it to my opponent, or not.

We had not exactly become friends during the hearing, but I had not expected to be stabbed in the back either.

On this occasion, I decided that perhaps he must have forgotten that he had agreed not to raise it - so I let it go. 

By "let it go" I mean that I didn't pull him aside after court, stick my finger in his face and yell, "You dirty liar!  How dare you attempt to pull a fast one on me in court!"

Instead, I simply resolved not to trust him ever again. 

The bar is a dangerous place to get a reputation that you can't be trusted. 

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths to which people will go when backed into a corner. 

Still, I would rather be remembered as the opponent that ran a fair case and lost it, than the one that had to cheat to win. 

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.