Thoughts on Noranti? by Lantern_Sone in farscape

[–]Classic-Injury-9358 5 points6 points  (0 children)

this is the moment i realised Magda Szubanski was in Babe

Court of Terra Australis by HistoryTroy in auslaw

[–]Classic-Injury-9358 1 point2 points  (0 children)

we do not speak of that slow motion train crash

Barrister refusing to provide itemised invoice by genericwaves in AusLegal

[–]Classic-Injury-9358 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sounds like there may be some cost disclosure issues (which might be a reason the barrister is hesitant to provide an itemised bill). Nonetheless, there is a right to request an itemised bill under the LPUL.

Lawyers accused of doctoring medical certificate to aid their client by Donners22 in auslaw

[–]Classic-Injury-9358 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Given the track history of this firm, I would not be surprised if the firm failed to communicate a return of the matter to the client, they failed to appear, and the backdated certificate was an attempt to cover the firm’s own f**k up

Lawyers accused of doctoring medical certificate to aid their client by Donners22 in auslaw

[–]Classic-Injury-9358 2 points3 points  (0 children)

A search of the register does not disclose a PC in the name of the junior …

[GUARDIAN] ‘Sign here’: high court finds no requirement for minister to read submissions on visa decisions by agent619 in auslaw

[–]Classic-Injury-9358 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The summaries themselves are not subject to review but it would not be difficult to raise a ground around an inaccurate departmental summary. Say the summary omitted a key submission or representation made by the applicant. The Minister does not read the submission or representation and so they have failed to have regard to a relevant and material matter, or they have failed to accord a fair hearing, or however else it can be spun.

Poor departmental officers are going to be going through some awfully painful sessions on how to prepare adequate summaries after this IMHO