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

Delay update ... "Extraordinary and excessive" delay - by the litigants ... Contest on costs ... Getting to grips with Qld industrial law takes time ... What is a "worker"? ... What is an "injury"? ... Justice Jenni frigging around ... Slow grind for earnest Circuiteer ... From judges' associate Ginger Snatch ... 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

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 ...


 

 

Justinian's Bloggers

London Calling ... Sizzling in the Old Dart ... Story of the complaining law graduate ... Tattle Life brought to book ... Beckham family feud over royal gong ... Floyd Alexander-Hunt's postcard ... Read more >> 

"What you are not being told by the media anywhere is that the death toll likely would not have been as high if it wasn't for DEI."

Charlie Kirk, American conservative and conspiracy theorist on the Texas floods ... The Charlie Kirk Show, July 9, 2025  Read more flatulence ... 


Justinian Featurettes

Tootsies with Planet Janet ... Water Softener and the Planet ... Further details of the width and depth of their relationship ... Chief Justice of the ACT grants Justinian's application for access to more documents ... A barrage of text messages and phone calls throughout the Drumgold investigation ... Collated reporting ... Read more >> 


Justinian's archive

Being chased by a dog called Rhetoric ... Justice Virginia Bell on rhetorical devices and barristering ... It seems to be a male thing ... Distractions from the truth ... Tulkinghorn asks, where would the bar be without bad rhetoric? ... September 14, 2012 ... Read more >> 


 

 

« Roddy Meagher's book gets the Kirby treatment | Main | Déjà Vu, all over again »
Tuesday
Dec062022

Slick Nick off the hook

Did DPP Nick Cowdery mislead the attorney general? ... Prisoner whose conviction had been quashed seeks ex gratia payment ... Opposed by the DPP ... After more than eight years the NSW Court of Appeal decides, sort of ... Molomby vanquished ... From Justinian's Archive ... December 4, 2003

DPP Nick Cowdery QC ... searching for advice on ex gratia payment

DID the NSW Director of Public Prosecutions "engage in conduct in connection with the practice of law" when he advised the Attorney General's Department against an ex gratia payment to a prisoner whose conviction was quashed?

Did he deliberately mislead the AG by misrepresenting the Court of Appeal judgment which overturned the conviction?

And was the Legal Services Commissioner correct in deciding that there was no "reasonable likelihood" that Nicholas Cowdery QC (as he was) would be found guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct or even professional misconduct?

All these questions received a resounding negative in a recent judgment of the NSW Court of Appeal (Mason P, Tobias JA, Foster AJA).

Counsel for the appellant Ted Kawicki, Tom "Tom" Molomby SC must be disappointed. He's been beating this particular drum for a long time. 

The saga started with Kawicki's successful appeal in 1995 against his conviction in 1994 for "knowingly maintaining an escaped prisoner". 

Kawicki had rather unwisely (as it turned out) loaned prison escapee Patrick Hudd $500 and the burning issue was whether he knew Hudd was an escapee at the time. 

The Court of Criminal Appeal ruled that the evidence in this regard was so "meagre", it was not reasonably open to the jury to find so. The grounds for conviction were deemed "unsafe and unsatisfactory" and Kawicki was acquitted.

Only trouble was, by the time his conviction was overturned, Kawicki had already served his entire sentence (ten months periodic detention). 

He promptly applied to the Attorney General's Department for ex gratia payment in compensation. The AG wrote to Nick Cowdery asking his advice. 

Nick said: don't pay him.

"It is my view that this prosecution was correctly carried brought and carried out ... The Court of Criminal Appeal took a certain view of the evidence but in my view the matter was one that had to be determined by the jury ... I recommend against the making of an ex gratia payment."

Kawicki and Molomby then wrote to the Legal Services Commissioner complaining that the DPP's advice was "deliberately misleading" and suggested that he was "guilty of professional misconduct". 

The Commissioner dismissed the complaint in February 2002 on the basis that Cowdery's letters containing the advice "had not been given in connection with the practice of law" but as part of his statutory duties. 

Even if he had been practising as a lawyer, the commissioner thought he would still not be found guilty.

Undaunted, Molomby and Kawicki mounted a Supreme Court challenge to that decision. It was dismissed by Burchett AJ in November last year.

"I am simply unable to see the basis on which it is contended that the legal Services Commissioner's decision was so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have reached it. For myself, I would have reached the same conclusion." 

Now a year later, and nearly nine years after Kawicki first applied for compensation, the NSW Court of Appeal has done the same. 

Kitchen oven expert Tobias JA concluded that Cowdery had presented his own personal opinion, knowing full well that the AG had in his hands a copy of the Court of Criminal Appeal's "unambiguously critical" judgment. Tobias said: 

"Whether or not one agrees with Mr Cowdery's opinion is not to the point ... He was not bound to accept the correctness of the contrary view formed by the Court of Criminal Appeal." 

As to whether the DPP was "conducting himself in connection with the practice of law", this was an open question, concluded Tobias. 

Problem solved. 

 

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.
Editor Permission Required
You must have editing permission for this entry in order to post comments.