Softly into the fray

03 March 2012 By Lawyers Weekly

Pulling the horse hair over their eyes Surely speaking out and having an opinion are concepts not entirely divorced from the art of lawyering.If that is the case, then Victoria’s legal…

Pulling the horse hair over their eyes

Surely speaking out and having an opinion are concepts not entirely divorced from the art of lawyering.

If that is the case, then Victoria’s legal profession should have a long, hard look at itself. You may recall that a recent Law Institute of Victoria survey on court attire was roundly snubbed by members, who obviously had better things to do than vote on the fate of a tradition that stretches back more than 300 years.


If such apathy wasn’t bad enough, it now looks even worse after it was last week revealed that mere laypersons — the great unwashed masses that is — managed to cobble together a significant response to the clobber questionnaire.

The LIV received 360 public responses, the majority of which were opposed to wigs and gowns being cloaked. However, it is the comments of those in favour of abolition that we’d like to draw attention to as some are quite witty and could conceivably make for an amusing judicial retort.

* “Wigs and Gowns should only be retained if the people who wear them should maintain complete authenticity such as wearing only 17th century non-elasticised underwear and follow personal hygiene practices from the same era.”

* “Wigs do NOT enhance the dignity of the court! They are anachronistic [and] look silly, you might as well wear a clown’s costume.”

LIV president Bill OShea was surprised by the public’s endorsement and, with the humourless languidness of his peers in mind, Folklaw was also surprised by his recent remarks, which we found similarly entertaining: “Given they are made of horse hair, this news will make a few of the slower nags running at Flemington yesterday very nervous indeed.”

Lawyers Weekly Discover

Softly into the fray

They finally made it onto the field, but judging by the lack of fanfare that greeted the Official Law Firm of the 2003 Rugby World Cup’s grand entrance, spectators could be forgiven for thinking another illegal substitution had taken place.

Unlike earlier this year, when Allens Arthur Robinson went to unprecedented lengths to inform everybody it was the preferred firm of the Rugger Buggers, not a single sound emerged from the top-tier firm as it came off the bench to play a vital role in the hearing surrounding England’s 16-man fiasco late last month.

Senior Pommy squad members fronted up at Team Allens headquarters in Sydney for the case. Reports say they were chauffer driven and entered via an underground carpark, the quest for secrecy costing them a photo opportunity with Big Ben Chifley outside the building.

Due to the hush hush of it all, we’re not sure whether Team Allens donned their Official Law Firm of the 2003 Rugby World Cup office jerseys during proceedings. According to legend, any member of the firm who pulls on the black and white pinstripes (imitation pictured, as our budget would not allow for purchase of the framed version) grows another leg.

Hulls cookin for good lookins

Victorian widows and widowers of the young and attractive persuasion need not despair about their physical desirability any more thanks to State Attorney-General Rob Hulls.

The man they call “Head Kicker” recently put a smile on thousands of gorgeous faces by introducing legislation that ensures spousal survivors are “no longer penalised for being good-looking in wrongful death payouts”.

The current provisions of the Wrongs Act are being amended because they allow courts to order favourable payouts for ugly and aged litigants, who are generally considered less likely to remarry. It’s a scenario that Hulls appears to be quite uncomfortable with.

“It’s no longer acceptable to assume that because someone is young and conventionally attractive they will marry into a financially supportive union,” he said. “Indeed, it is offensive to even make such a suggestion.”

Keep on the lookout for publicly funded liposuctions and collagen injections.

Pink fits Pipers

Why are Piper Alderman wearing pink? A tribute to a decade of Saturday Night TV without Ozzie The Ostrich? Enamoured with the pastel coloured Power Ranger? Trying to look as pretty as Molly Ringwald even?

The truth is we’re not sure. But if red makes things go faster, then its lighter derivative must also possess some speed enhancement capabilities if Pipers’ recent upset Indoor Soccer win over Minter Ellison in Adelaide is anything to go by.

Given as much chance of survival as a musk lifesaver in a dank pocket, the Random Pandas (why they didn’t plump for Flaming Flamingos is anyone’s guess) crushed the tearaway leaders 8-4.

They tell us the jerseys are an away strip; a good choice considering the chances of a colour clash are virtually zero in the male dominated competition.

Softly into the fray
Intro image
lawyersweekly logo