Assignment 4.1
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Murdoch University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
ETHCS
Subject
Law
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by BarristerEelPerson909
(1a) Mr. Martinovic disregarded his paramount responsibility to the court and did not carry out the administration of justice since he carelessly started the proceeding on behalf of his client "without prospects of success." (ASCR r 3). Due to Mr. Martinovic’s inexperience, he failed to operate diligently and competently. The lawyer claimed he was working pro bono and that he had followed his client's directions, but in that case, he had violated the ASCR r 17.1 against functioning as "merely the client's mouthpiece" and ASCR r 4.1.4 against maintaining professional independence.
(1b) The fact that Mr. Martinovic was representing his client pro bono has no bearing on the court's ruling in this case, and as a lawyer, he has a responsibility to provide legal services of the same caliber whether representing his client pro bono or representing a paying client. Because solicitors are privileged in that they are able to represent other people in the legal system and are specifically trained to understand the law, they have a duty to facilitate access to justice for all. The court understands this and will not consider pro bono cases when making decisions in any legal matter, treating them the same as non-pro bono cases.
(1c) According to Rule 17.3 of the Conduct Rules, a lawyer may not submit arguments or voice opinions in court that express or appear to express their own views. However, Mr. Martinovic filed a bias allegation (which he later dropped), which the judge found to be an expression of his personal opinions. Furthermore, it was determined that he either purposefully disregarded his professional responsibility or behaved irresponsibly in spite of them by making unfounded accusations. As a result, the court had the authority and ability to require him to pay his own costs. S99 of CPA is also relevant because it falls under the "wasted costs" jurisdiction. (2a) As I don't meet the time required under LPUL s 49(1)(b) for the time frame or periods comparable to, despite having practiced for about six months. I am not qualified to represent Indira as an independent lawyer because I have only had two years of supervised legal practice. A civil penalty of up to 100 penalty units may be imposed for violating a practicing certificate's requirement, as stated in LPUL s 54. It also qualifies as a reason under s 82(1)(a) for altering, suspending, or cancelling the certificate. Additionally, the actions may be considered professional misconduct or unsatisfactory behaviour in accordance with s 298.
(2b) I would be able to represent Indira as long as I am no more on a restricted practicing certificate. Yet, I would need to make sure that I get and receive recognition for a professional indemnity insurance under the National Pro Bono Professional Indemnity Insurance Scheme of the Center.
(2c) Legal Aid offers representation to underprivileged individuals in the fields of criminal, family, and civil law; Indria's case falls under employment law, thus that qualifies. At the same time, Indira should pass both the means test and the merit test. The means test takes into account the amount of money the applicant receives from her job, Centrelink, or other sources, whether she owns a car, house, or anything else of worth, and if she provides financial support for others or is supported herself.
(3) Low income earners are a social category that I think deserves legal protection and aid. Given that legal expenses might be high and out of reach for this demographic group, pro bono aid is crucial if they are to have an equal chance to seek legal counsel. Low-income
individuals can participate in Legal Aid, the Law Society of NSW Pro Bono Scheme, or the Australia Pro Bono Center, as examples of pro bono opportunities.
(4a) The communication gap between Barry and I is one problem. Barney is having problems communicating in English as he is only nodding and not saying anything. Since the customer's kid is speaking to me rather than the client directly, I might want to think about hiring a qualified interpreter via the Aboriginal Interpreter Service. Cross-cultural awareness is something else to think about. Barney may view avoiding eye contact as being courteous in his culture. It would be incorrect to infer from the absence of eye contact that he is dishonest.
(4b) Due to possible conflicts and wrongdoing on your part, the practicing certificate will be harmed. Due to the fact that this is a pro bono affair, money will be used. A lawyer may have
violated the law, which might have resulted in misbehaviour and other potentially harmful offenses. The Supreme Court will have disciplinary authority as a result of this. LUPL 2015, s 296 and 297.
(4c) In accordance with s 37 of the LPUL Australian Spectator's Conduct Rules 2015, it would be extremely suitable to either be monitored in the subject. The alternative would be to decline to represent Barney because my lack of experience would be deemed to be in contradiction with my obligation to provide legal services competently and diligently under s
4 of the LPUL Australian Spectator's Conduct Rules 2015.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help