find the latest legal job
Corporate/Commercial Lawyers (2-5 years PAE)
Category: Corporate and Commercial Law | Location: Adelaide SA 5000
· Specialist commercial law firm · Long-term career progression
View details
Graduate Lawyer / Up to 1.5 yr PAE Lawyer
Category: Personal Injury Law | Location: Brisbane CBD & Inner Suburbs Brisbane QLD
· Mentoring Opportunity in Regional QLD · Personal Injury Law
View details
Corporate and Commercial Partner
Category: Corporate and Commercial Law | Location: Adelaide SA 5000
· Full time · Join a leading Adelaide commercial law firm
View details
In-house Legal Counsel & Commercial Lawyers
Category: Corporate and Commercial Law | Location: All Sydney NSW
· Providing lawyers with flexibility and control over when they work, how they work and who they work for.
View details
In-house Legal Counsel & Commercial Lawyers
Category: Corporate and Commercial Law | Location: All Melbourne VIC
· Providing lawyers with flexibility and control over when they work, how they work and who they work for.
View details
Judge throws a stone at judiciary

Judge throws a stone at judiciary

JUSTICE KEITH Mason has chided the judiciary for being offensive to one another, revealing that spiteful arguments between members are one-sided and serve to erode the institutional morale of…

JUSTICE KEITH Mason has chided the judiciary for being offensive to one another, revealing that spiteful arguments between members are one-sided and serve to erode the institutional morale of the court.

In a speech given to the Judicial Conference of Australia last month, Justice Mason, the president of the NSW Court of Appeal said that above all others, judges ought to know the meaning of their words. And, by his own admission, the judge’s speech title, Throwing Stones, wryly suggests that he is both the most- and the least-qualified to speak.

For Justice Mason, it is when one judge decides to chastise another whose decision is under appeal — who has no recourse to defend his decision — that brings to light a problem that he says should be acknowledged and analysed. “Such criticism will invariably strike a target who was uncharged and unrepresented,” he said.

Justice Mason conceded that in a system that values free speech and judicial independence, and an appeal court structure whose duty it is to correct material error, that casualties caused by barbarous tongues can be part of life as a judge.

“[But], like casualties of war, these harmful impacts are justifiable only to the extent that they are inevitable,” he said.

In his speech, Justice Mason said that the relationship between appellate and lower courts can impact upon the effective working of the judiciary. In his opinion, the High Court and Court of Appeal often “adopt personally offensive language when detecting and correcting an error below”. This “undermines the mutual respect that should exist as between the different layers of the judicial hierarchy. It promotes an us and them mentality,” he said.

According to the judge, this erosion of deference between the judicial echelons can serve to reinforce the perception that the higher courts lack understanding of the dynamics of “life in the trenches”. This “saps the institutional morale of the lower court”.

Since advocates submissions tend to focus upon the factual error itself, rather than its maker, the “choice to castigate the sinner is almost always the unprompted decision of the appeal judge”, Justice Mason said.

According to Justice Mason, “the obligation to act without fear or favour does not authorise the venting of personal spleen, even where error is clearly established”.

While he acknowledged that there are scenarios that call for a strong response — disregarding binding precedent, fallacious reasoning and mistakes involving well-known legal principles — Justice Mason warned that “all of us will make mistakes, sometimes in the very act of perceiving them in others”.

The judge added that an appeal judge should carefully consider the cost-benefit analysis of choosing to go beyond what is necessary for deciding the appeal and attacking the judge, or their court generally.

“The appeal judge wields a mighty weapon if he or she chooses to add a personal rebuke,” he said.

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

Judge throws a stone at judiciary
lawyersweekly logo
Promoted content
Recommended by Spike Native Network
more from lawyers weekly
Dec 14 2017
International arbitration and business culture
Promoted by Maxwell Chambers. This article discusses the impact of international arbitration on t...
Papua New Guinea flag
Dec 14 2017
World-first mining case launched in PNG
Citizens of Papua New Guinea have launched landmark legal proceedings against the country’s govern...
Dec 14 2017
Punishing offenders twice pointless, politicians warned
The president of the Law Society of NSW has warned legislators from other states about adopting cont...
APPOINTMENTS
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'...
opinion
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...
Help
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 & ...