Two HCA judgements handed down

Xerri v The King. Judgement summary here.

Lesianawai v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. Judgement summary here.

Former ACT DPP Shane Drumgold says Sofronoff findings ‘tainted’ [AFR paywall]

Lehrmann prosecutor Shane Drumgold teaches law at University of Canberra [Canberra Times paywall]

a copy of the decision can be found here - SafeWork NSW v Qantas Ground Services Pty Ltd (No. 4) - NSW Caselaw

“Mark Urquhart was grilled by the surgeon’s barrister Sue Chrysanthou, SC, over statements he made when he ceased being a patient.”

the matter is being live streamed here - Federal Court of Australia

“A former Ernst and Young tax partner has won a court fight to keep his name suppressed for now as he faces allegations of profiting $700,000 off a tax exploitation scheme”

solicitor handed 30 day prison sentence for contempt (suspended for two years on conditions)

[54] The solicitor made some ambitious – perhaps misguided and inappropriate – submissions as to the reasonableness of Mr Zhura’s “reckless” conduct in committing the sexual touching offences. These submissions were based on the place and circumstances in which the offences occurred. While the solicitor, who is not a beginner, said he would not want to be “misheard” on the issue and emphasised the obvious fact that any “young lady” has “a right to be out in these clubs and do what they want to do and behave as they wish”, he went on to submit that such venues are “sexually charged arenas”. He said they were places where “people go to meet other people”. He sought to draw a contrast between a man groping a woman on a dancefloor and doing so on a train or at the Woolworth on a Sunday morning. The lawyer argued, while he “struggle[d] with the choice of words to describe this”, that “[i]t is the sort of contact people do make in those clubs and in many other circumstances would have been consented to.” This led to a submission that Mr Zhura’s recklessness as to consent was “less unreasonable” in the context of him being on a dancefloor in a nightclub.

[55] It must be emphasised that the facts were that Mr Zhura laid his hands on women with whom he had no previous conduct. He had not spoken to any of the three women he chose to grope and had not been dancing with them. Their first contact was when he touched them from behind. It is probably unnecessary to say this, but I will add that where an advocate struggles to find the words to make a submission such as this, it may be a strong indication that the submission ought not to be made at all. I also emphasise that nothing in the submissions made by Mr Zhura orally to the Magistrate, or in writing to this Court, even hinted that the venue in which these incidents occurred provided any justification or mitigation whatsoever.