find the latest legal job
Corporate Counsel and Company Secretary
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Newcastle, Maitland & Hunter NSW
· Highly-respected, innovative and entrepreneurial Not-for-Profit · Competency based Board
View details
Chief Counsel and Company Secretary
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Newcastle, Maitland & Hunter NSW
· Dynamic, high growth organisation · ASX listed market leader
View details
In-house Projects Lawyer | Renewables / Solar | 2-5 Years PQE
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: All Australia
· Help design the future · NASDAQ Listed
View details
Insurance Lawyer (3-5 PAE)
Category: Insurance and Superannuation Law | Location: Brisbane CBD & Inner Suburbs Brisbane QLD
· Dynamic organisation ·
View details
Legal Counsel
Category: Corporate and Commercial Law | Location: North Sydney NSW 2060
· 18 month fixed term contract · 3-5 years PQE with TMT exposure
View details
Legal community defends profession

Legal community defends profession

The legal profession has hit back at comments in the media by Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland that using lawyers to resolve disputes was akin to grabbing a "tiger by the tail" and…

The legal profession has hit back at comments in the media by Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland that using lawyers to resolve disputes was akin to grabbing a "tiger by the tail" and being "up the creek without a paddle".

Last Friday, McClelland told The Australian that the legal profession needed to embrace consumer reform of the profession because existing structure had failed to adapt to modern demands and expectations.

He said, prior to his "state of the legal nation" address at the Australian Legal Convention, that "there was no way many lawyers would willingly be consumers of their own legal services," and that "if you are in a dispute with someone, as soon as you go through a lawyer's door, you have grabbed a tiger by the tail".

Queensland Law Society CEO Noela L'Estrange has hit back, stating that such comments were alienating the profession. "Suggesting that 'as soon as you go through a lawyer's door you have grabbed a tiger by the tail' is hardly an appropriate way to win the profession's support for what will be momentous changes to its structure," L'Estrange said.

"And stating that using a lawyer to resolve a dispute left the client 'well and truly up the creek without a paddle' is a ludicrous comment totally at odds with the reality."

The Law Council has also expressed disappointment at the remarks, stating that McClelland's comments were disrespectful of the profession and amounted to little more than popular stereotypes.

Law Council president John Corcoran said: "People come to lawyers with legal problems which they have been unable to solve themselves. We do not create them. The vast majority of disputes are resolved without adjudication by the courts. Many clients would attest to the fact that it if wasn't for their lawyers, the problem would not have been solved."

L'Estrange said recent statistics from the Queensland Legal Services Commission show a different story of customer satisfaction. She pointed to the commission's 2007-08 annual report, which showed there were 6926 solicitors practising in the state, with 1123 public complaints received.

"Of these complaints, 722 were deemed as 'actual' complaints worthy of investigation. If we make the fair assumption that, on average, each solicitor dealt with 10 matters during that period, this indicates that only 1.04 per cent of matters led to a complaint that warranted investigation," said L'Estrange.

"If this is regarded as a 'failure rate', then it would not appear to support any proposal for increased regulation. It would, however, support the proposition that customer satisfaction amongst the users of Queensland legal services is extremely high."

L'Estrange also objected to the use of the term "punters" by the Attorney-General to describe law firm clients. "Our lawyers see clients as real people seeking professional advice for real legal problems," she said. "To describe them as 'punters' is objectionable. Queensland lawyers are hard-working professionals who ably fulfill their duty, which is to act always in the best interests of their clients."

Like this story? Read more:

QLS condemns actions of disgraced lawyer as ‘stain on the profession’

NSW proposes big justice reforms to target risk of reoffending

The legal budget breakdown 2017

Legal community defends profession
lawyersweekly logo
Promoted content
Recommended by Spike Native Network
more from lawyers weekly
LCA president Fiona McLeod SC
Aug 17 2017
Where social fault lines meet the justice gap in Aus
After just returning from a tour of the Northern Territory, LCA president Fiona McLeod SC speaks wit...
Marriage equality flag
Aug 17 2017
ALHR backs High Court challenge to marriage equality postal vote
Australian Lawyers for Human Rights (ALHR) has voiced its support for a constitutional challenge to ...
Give advice
Aug 17 2017
A-G issues advice on judiciary’s public presence
Commonwealth Attorney-General George Brandis QC has offered his advice on the public presence of jud...
Allens managing partner Richard Spurio, image courtesy Allens' website
Jun 21 2017
Promo season at Allens
A group of lawyers at Allens have received promotions across its PNG and Australian offices. ...
May 11 2017
Partner exits for in-house role
A Victorian lawyer has left the partnership of a national firm to start a new gig with state governm...
Esteban Gomez
May 11 2017
National firm recruits ‘major asset’
A national law firm has announced it has appointed a new corporate partner who brings over 15 years'...
Nicole Rich
May 16 2017
Access to justice for young transgender Australians
Reform is looming for the process that young transgender Australians and their families must current...
Geoff Roberson
May 11 2017
The lighter side of the law: when law and comedy collide
On the face of it, there doesn’t seem to be much that is amusing about the law, writes Geoff Rober...
May 10 2017
Advocate’s immunity – without fear or without favour but not both
On 29 March 2017, the High Court handed down its decision in David Kendirjian v Eugene Lepore & ...