r/auslaw

🍁lawyer here. As a person who is often in court, it’s actually incredibly difficult to carve out the time to watch other people in court- which is too bad, because I get a lot out of observing. I’ve benefited so much from being able to watch the YouTube streams of matters from the Australian federal court, I wish I could count it as CLE. My country doesn’t have anything approaching this level of online access to court proceedings. I feel that watching Australian matters during my parental leave has kept the law part of my brain from totally atrophying (it has instead only mostly atrophied.) Do you find that lawyers in Australia take advantage of this availability and watch as well, or is that not a thing?

Is there a point where he will be removed from office for this kind of stuff?

https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2026/2026fca0454

Whilst only a leave to appeal decisions, the transcript extracts (which are apparently just examples) are troubling.

>AFL appeals board finds Tribunal hearing that found a conviction and fine for Port Adelaide's Zak Butters abusing an umpire was a miscarriage of justice

>...
The AFL has apologised for the inconvenience caused to all parties after a tribunal decision to fine Zak Butters for abusive language against umpire Nick Foot was thrown out on appeal.

>...

>The board then took less than 15 minutes to return a decision on the first item of Butters's appeal — that a member of the original tribunal panel, Jason Johnson, had infringed on Butters's right to a fair hearing by leaving his office during the hearing to drive to an open inspection.

>He took part in the latter stages of the hearing by phone.

>

>In the hearing, Butters's counsel, Paul Ehrlich KC, said Johnson's behaviour was "inexplicable" and "amounted to a miscarriage of justice".

>Butters's case was that for a period of at least 12 to 14 minutes Johnson was driving his car in the final stages of the hearing, which included closing submissions by Butters's original counsel.

>Counsel for the AFL Albert Dinelli KC argued that Johnson's actions were "regrettable", this did not mean that the original decision should be overturned.

>"The relevant test is not just that it led to an error of law, but that it had a material impact on the decision," he said.

>"It was a minor lapse and not one that could be described as serious inattention.

Great Stuff

Does anyone know the details of what happened to the Headnote newsletter? They went on Christmas hiatus and never came back.

This thread is a place for /r/Auslaw's more curious types to glean career advice from our experienced contributors. Need advice on clerkships? Want to know about life in law? Have a question about your career in law (at any stage, from clerk to partner/GC and beyond). Confused about what your dad means when he says 'articles'? Just ask here.

Hi,

What are people using in their firms in terms of AI?

P.S. this post is short because it kept thinking I was breaching rules. Hopefully this doesn't.

Thanks all!

If my ghost summoned to appear in court for offense commited post mortem, can I successfully argue that I lost my legal personhood upon death, and thus the elements are not met because the Act clearly states it's an offence for a *person* to commited the offending act? Also, if given a life sentence, am I immediately released?

Shaw was charged with dangerous operation of a motor vehicle.

The ordeal was so strange, even Magistrate Sarah Thompson said "in 25 years of practice ... I have never seen such bizarre behaviour".

"The behaviour of the complainant was erratic, it was dangerous, it placed you in danger, you also placed her in danger," Thompson said.

"It was a poor decision that you made in the circumstances, being confronted with what anyone objectively would see as a terrifying situation."

Shaw was disqualified from driving for six months.

A rising para-athlete, her dreams of competing at the LA Paralympics in 2028 could be in jeopardy.