Turmoil at the NSW Bar n’ Grill as restorationists push ahead with their demand for royal plumage … Federal Court rumours … Chief Justice lock-out … Van Diemen’s Land briefs haggle to hook onto the government teat 

A special urgent meeting of the council was held on Friday (May 8) to consider resolutions proposed by the “monarchist” faction of the council.  

Angst was thick in the air and at one point it seemed that there may not be a president of the bar association to attend that night’s grand bench & bar banquet. 

Some have characterised the meeting as an “attempted coup”. 

The monarchists are basically the QC restorationists, who swept to a majority position on the council at last year’s elections. They have been meeting in private conclave, away from others on the council, in particular without the knowledge of president Jane Needham, senior vice Noel Hutley and junior vice Arthur Moses. 

Those three positions could be in jeopardy as the restorationists flex their steroid-pumped biceps. 

The queen’s men came up with a series of motions to advance the QC cause, change various protocols, and attempt to take control of the executive. 

The proposals were dumped on the meeting by secretary Philippe Doyle Gray. 

Bret Walker gave advice that the proposed motions were invalid and at that point the proposals were beaten off.  

Prime among the agitators are Paul Menzies, David Bennett, Alan Sullivan, Jeffrey Phillips and John Hyde Page. 

There’s another meeting of the council on Thursday (May 14) at which a motion is likely to be passed instructing the bar leaders to call on the attorney general and request the reintroduction of QCs. 

This may force the resignation of the antithetical president and the two vices. 

It’s all faintly ridiculous as there’s little chance the Baird government will reintroduce the bauble, which requires amendments to the Legal Profession Act. 

When Justinian asked Mike Baird about ennobling barristers, he didn’t want to know about it, and flicked the question to AG Gabrielle Upton. 

In a carefully crafted response she said: 

“As the new attorney general, I am willing to consider any idea put forward by the NSW Bar Association in relation to reintroducing the title of Queen’s Counsel. However, I would need to be satisfied that any change would improve the administration of justice in NSW.” 

How does the purple gong improve the administration of justice? No doubt the submissions will be spell-binding. 

The primary case against, of course, is that it has more to do with ego and status than the administration of justice. 

Warwick Hunt, Mr Junior at Friday night’s feast, made an amusing speech ridiculing the desperate grab by “princesses” for the royal adornment. 

Restorationists sat glum-faced throughout his oration. 

There’ll be more news out of Thursday’s meeting. There’s even talk of an EGM at some stage, so that the rank n’ file might have a say about what’s going on. 

Judges are bemused (polite word) at rumours of Gorgeous George Brandis’ next appointment to the Federal Court. 

One deserving name on monarchist and Liberal Party lips is that of the former member for Wentworth, Peter King!

On the weekend, a fortnight ago, Robert French CJ was enjoying a moment of quiet reflection on the terrace outside his High Court gaff. 

Gummow and Kirby had retired long ago, so there was no one else in the building at a time when the rest of the nation was listening to the races or taking a nap.

The terrace door must have slammed shut because a startled stranger strolling by the lake was hailed by the the CJ and asked to notify the AFP to let him back into the building. 

You may have missed one of the weirdest newspaper editorials commenting on the appointment last month of Michelle Gordon to the High Court. 

It came straight from the bowels of the Financial Review, which declared that Justice Gordon deliberately keeps a low personal profile and “insists that professional persons such as herself should be judged by the quality of their work”. 

On it goes: 

“While there’s much to be said for that, the latest instance is not reassuring for those who think judges should not meddle in business arrangements struck by consenting adults. Justice Gordon handed down the original ruling that found the ANZ Bank guilty of ‘unconscionable’ behaviour for simply enforcing a contractual arrangement that included a fee on credit card customers who failed to pay their debts on time. 

Her judgment displayed plenty of meticulous lawyering but precious little commonsense and was thankfully demolished last week by a full bench of the Federal Court … 

We struggle to fathom how a Liberal attorney general has elevated to the highest court in the land a judge who has made such a flawed anti-business ruling.” 

And newspapers wonder why they are going out of business backwards. 

Word has reached us that various members of the legal profession in Taswegia are bating their breaths.  

AG and former Pleece criminologist, Vanessa Goodwin, had her ear bent by the Tas Law Society about the goings on in the Legal Aid Commission.  

Vanessa was so thrilled she hired retired Supremo Peter Evans to do a wholesale review of the entire operations of Legal Aid. 

A report is expected soon.

The LS has for years complained about the size of Legal Aid’s in house practice – which includes Tasmania’s first female SC, Tamara Jago. It is alleged that Jago & Co pick the eyes out of all the juicy criminal work, leaving the private briefs starving and shivering.

Apparently more than two-thirds of the legal aid budget goes on in house salaries and administrative costs. This has caused private lawyers to give up legal aid in droves – they can’t get grants of aid and if they do get them the amounts are niggardly. 

Not only that, but the administration has become frustratingly inconsistent – the reason being that the worthies who do the grants work only one day a week.  

Apparently none of the in-house people are particularly nervous because they are all (highly paid) permanent public servants and are therefore safe from the chop. Thanks to a pay claim driven mostly by the Crown’s employed lawyers, from which the legal aid lawyers benefited, salaries have increased by more than 40 percent in the past 10 years.  

That does not necessarily correspond to a 40 percent increase in productivity. 

The private lawyers want a restructure – i.e. they want to snaffle more government funded work. If that happens there could be public sector sackings. 

Who knows, it might even give Gorgeous George Brandis some bright ideas about how to strip more out of other legal aids on the big island.