SEARCH
Justinian News

Class action against pro-Palestine academics at the University of Sydney ... Toltz v Riemer; Toltz v Keane ... Federal Court file >> 

Politics Media Law Society

My Role in Gough's Downfall ... Reporter-at-Large … Scoops that flushed out the deceit behind the Dismissal … Big anniversary chinwag in Canberra on November 11 … The combined forces of Kerr, Ellicott and cousin Garfield … Constitutional manipulation … Maurice Byers to the rescue ... Read more >> 

This area does not yet contain any content.
Free Newsletter
Justinian Columnists

Knit one, purl one ... Iron Lady of legal rectitude endorses Gageler ... The chief justice wants judges on the straight and narrow ... The cardboard cutout model of legislative supremacy ... The evils of judicial activism ... Procrustes on the dance floor with the Legislative-Judicial Foxtrot ... Read more >> 

Blow the whistle

 

News snips ...


Justinian is taking a short break ... Normal transmission resumes on Monday, October 6, 2025 ...

Justinian's Bloggers

Berlusconi's dream world ... Revenge politics in Italy ... Independence of prosecutors under attack ... Constitutional assault ... The years of lead ... Investigations reopened into old murders ... High drama at Milan's Leoncavallo ... Rome correspondent Silvana Olivetti reports ... Read more >> 

"If we’re only picking people who have got completely lily-white records then we’ll be missing out on a lot of people that can contribute to public life.

NSW Premier Chris Minns, endorsing Mal Lanyon, his pick for Police Commissioner, whose contributions to public life include shouting drunken obscenities at a paramedic who came to his aid, and commandeering a police launch for private entertainment on New Year's eve ... Read more flatulence ... 


Justinian Featurettes

Schmoozing and betrayal ... Judge Water Softener rides into Integrityville mounted high on his horse ... Judicial review of corruption finding ... Intriguing submissions ... Unprecedented assistance to morals monitor ... The scale of the sub-rosa intrigue ... Plenty to think about ... Ginger Snatch reports ... Read more >> 

Justinian's archive

News Desk Special ... Angelic death notices from the bar ... Soapy slips on FOI changes ... Unusual interlocutory costs order for Chris Dale ... Judge ticks off Abbott in letters' page ... Knock About's festive salute to the coppers ... January 19, 2015 ... 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.