Ethics in Family Law

Happens, the Divorce Down Under podcast where we talk about everything and everything family law related.

Two split happens, the Divorce Down Under podcast with me, Alex, and my fellow family lawyer, Liza. Who's there? I promise, yes. I am here, sorry. I thought you were gonna keep talking. No, no, no, that happens later on and and and too much. So today I thought we might go into the area of ethics in family law. Well I mean law generally. And this uh doesn't just apply to lawyers. I'm thinking about it as a more broad subject about how

We have ethical obligations if we're a practitioner, that we represent somebody. Yep. And also how if you're a party or sewer proceedings, what your duties are as well, what your ethical obligations. Yeah, that's a big one. It is and it's um yeah, there are lots of decisions in these sort of areas and th the rules have been written for us lawyers. But people who are engaged in court proceedings perhaps sometimes aren't sufficiently aware of their own obligations about

um their ethical position and things like disclosure. But so I'll turn this one over to you then and start the ball rolling about what is ethics? What does it mean in when we're talking about it in our So I like to um define it as being It's the moral compass, it's the duty that um that exists, that means that that is approved by society. So sometimes you might have a personal belief and it might be the right thing or the wrong thing to do.

and um an ethics when we talk about ethics we're talking about it at a larger scale. So rather than just talking about your own moral compass, we're talking about more of a What is the right thing to do? What is the wrong thing to do? And what are you obliged to do in order to ensure that that justice is going to be served. So when we're talking about ethics in the family law context, w we need to make sure because of course no matter what the situation is, we all need to make sure that there is

um the proper administration of justice. And so in doing so we need to be all on a very si same sort of page. And so that's where we have to have that benchmark of and and that's what we t we're talking about when we're saying you've got a duty to do this or a duty to do that. It's it's all founded in achieving that benchmark so that there's that um that perception of fairness to everyone.

And sometimes you you come into conflict with what a client might want you to put forward and what you as a practitioner, as a solicitor, what you must do. I mean I know that in the solicitor's conduct rules our paramount is to the court because we're all officers of the court and to the administration of justice. You would have to be client.

Your client might say, I want you to do this, but if that conflicts with your duty of the court, you can't as a practitioner and you have to say, Sorry, I can't act for you if those are your instructions. Yeah. So for example, um, you know, it might be saying, I want you to um I want you to tell the other side that I'm not going to be you know, I I'm

I'm not going to comply with these orders and I want you to draft up something that is going to help me not comply. Well we can't do that. We have to our overriding duty is to the court. And we can't um and we're not a mi a mouthpiece for you.

So that's the that's the biggest thing that you have to realise as a client from your perspective is saying, Well, just because I want this doesn't necessarily mean that my lawyer can actually put that forward. There are a number of things that we ha as practitioners we have to be very careful of and in family law one of the biggest things that I've seen is um when a client may

uh allegations that are serious allegations against someone as lawyers we're actually not permitted to put that into affidavit evidence or even in correspondence and and allege that about people or other lawyers without some sort of reasonable basis for doing so. It's not gonna be enough that, you know, my client says that that's the case.

You really need to if the more serious the allegation, the more evidence we need to be able to put forward. We need something that's a little bit more substantial than, Oh, this is just what I think. So it really does require us to spend some good time with our client. If they're s making a serious allegation about the other person you've got to talk to them in some detail like, Well, why do you think that? And give me an example of when that has occurred and give me some

Give me a time and a date on who said what to whom and what you observed. It needs to be specifics. Yeah that's right. We can't be making general swathing c um allegations about people when they're very serious. So we'll be we'll be in a bit of trouble for that and the court won't look too kindly on yourself either. No, that's right. And if you if you do put those kinds of allegations against somebody and there is no basis for it, well

At the very least you can expect that your credibility is out of the window. You are the little boy that cried wolf. Yep. Um that doesn't mean that these a these allegations don't get taken seriously. Of course they do and they must But we have to be careful and walking on that ep ethical tightrope about not putting something without there being at at least a reasonable or a proper foundation for saying so.

Yeah, okay. So I notice yeah I don't notice. I r you we read these things all the time, yeah with what And I always like to come back to the overarching purpose of the rules. And it's easy I think sometimes you can you know, you lose the sight of the wood for the trees, you get so busy and wrapped up in Yeah, answering this letter or the other side have said this, doing you know it just being reactive to what's happening right now. That happens so much, doesn't it?

It does. I mean it's I mean it's human nature, isn't it? You know, somebody says something, you want to say something back. And sometimes you need to go stop. sit back, what are we all trying to achieve here? And then i I think it often helps to go back to the fundamental purpose. If you look at the the rules for family law matters, this is the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. Family law rules? 2021, if you want to look them up. The overarching purpose

is to facilitate the just resolution of disputes according to law and as quickly, inexpensively and efficiently as possible. Now that's obvious it it's something of a an aspirational mission statement. Yeah. But it's really helpful to keep coming back to that. That if you get drawn into a tit for tat battle of correspondence Realistically, thousands and thousands of dollars going back and forth on unnecessary correspondence sum.

And much as y you know, you you want to be able to put your clients case forward and and and as forthrightly as possible so that they're feeling vindicated and having their voice heard, but you may be doing them a disservice by engaging in unnecessary Coming back to that kind of fundamental, what are we for? We're here for the best purposes, we're f to look after the interests of our clients. So long as it doesn't conflict with it's like I I saw i Robot again at the week came with my others.

Brilliant film, fantastic film, it was a great book. But you know, the the three rules of robotics, you know, must not do any harm to humans, except if, you know, then you have your your And it's a bit like that with we we must do the best thing for our clients so long as it doesn't conflict with our duty to the courts and the administration of justice.

Yeah, well I d I um see it a lot where you get six page letters from the other side which talks about the history between them. Um, and they're expecting a response or uh some sort of concession or admission that you agree with that history and nine times out of ten you don't agr your client doesn't agree with that history.

And what I try to do in that instance is just say, look, we just put the histories aside. Let's focus on what we're trying to achieve and and rather g than get getting caught up in the in the small details um that really don't matter in Oh yes you did. Oh no you didn't. Yeah, you you have cases where they're they're together for twenty uh twenty plus years or something.

And realistically, a lot of the time your contributions aren't going to be as significant and they're saying, Oh, well, I I I use my twenty thousand dollars from my super back in nineteen ninety eight and That's probably more than twenty years now. But anyway, that's that's how good my maths is. Um but in terms of working out when you're um you know talking about contributions, you go, well, no, actually this is just a case about future needs. This is what you need to be focused on.

Don't get caught up on the parts that aren't really relevant and to your actual case. And that's what bringing it back to the You just need to focus on the most inexpensive means and the most just means. Um to get that resolution. that will usually involve um not entering into a war on correspondence with the other side. Yeah, it's easy it easier sometimes probably best practice really to turn around and say

Thank you. We acknowledge clients got a copy of that. Our instructions are that he or she or they don't agree with large tracts of that, but it's not productive to have litigation by correspondent. So let's focus upon what needs to be decided and determined now.

One of the things I usually ask myself when I write correspondence is, is this helpful? Is this going to make the other side think, you know, want to, you know, come towards me in in respect of my client's position or are they going to go against? Wh which way is it going to send them? Are they going to be sent running? If they're going to be sent running, what is the point? Rydyn ni'n helpu'r client? Rydyn ni? Rydyn ni? Rydyn ni? Rydyn ni? Rydyn ni? Rydyn ni? Rydyn ni? Rydyn ni? Rydyn ni?

Mislead people. Yeah, but that happens a lot. Well the Legal Services Commission exists for a reason if people have done it. Undertakings of course for a solicitor to give an undertaking is a pretty serious thing.

I had to give one um recently and you know here's here's a difficult And it was um required by the court for all practitioners in the to give an undertaking not to discuss um there was material that was produced on subpoena and we're not permitted to discuss the contents of that um those documents with our client. Yeah, you've told me about this one.

Really, isn't it? Yeah. So then of course yeah. So Um, in this particular case, you know, they're the other side obviously wanna progress and try and have some time with the child and and I'm going, Well, I'm not permitted to talk about this with my client and I don't think that it's appropriate that we even discuss the time. Yeah, it's because it's how I'm therefore making that decision for my client. As to whether or not and I'm telling her what what is

um what is actually going to be the proper thing to do in that case. And that's a that's a judgment call for the client. That's not that's not me. really or she can't have the benefit of your knowledge of the things that she's not allowed to see. It it is quite quite bizarre sometimes that situation. So and I'm still stuck with that um undertaking so because it you know, the court still hasn't discharged the lawyers from um speaking about it.

Well I ha uh I w it wasn't an undertaking given but I was in in the midst midway through a hearing not so very long ago and the uh judicial registrar decided to release a particular report to the solicitors only.

So go away and have a read of this. You can't tell your your your client what it actually says, but you can discuss it in general terms. I think I I don't know how to do that in general terms. I'm just gonna I'm gonna read it and say, Okay, these are the kind of conclusions it's making. What do you say about You know, and m and my client was actually very helpful.

issues that were arising. But as a solicitor I'm going I'm in a you know caught between a rock and a hard I want to be able to tell my client precisely what's being said about um their you know their family and the things that are going on there, but I can't because I've been down. I didn't miss somebody. I could talk to the court again in half an hour's time. In fact, we're not going to be able to We we actually are meant to pass on information to our

You know, say if even if it's something that's not favourable, even if it's a crappy offer and we just think, no, this is just an absolute waste of time, we still have to pass it on to our client. We're not allowed to just hold and go, Oh no, I think it's best that you don't see this or anything like that unless of course there's a there's a real issue that it may cause them harm or they're going to lead them to some sort of harm. Um but in that case I probably

be seeking it a advice from other senior practitioners and or the Queensland Law Society for that matter before I decided to do something like that. But in terms of um you know, correspondence sometimes, you know, it's it's terrible correspondence that you get but you still and it you may not like or your client may not like what is being said about But you've still got to pass it on to them. Yeah, that's our obligation to give you the better news as well as the good. Yeah, okay. All right. So

Going back to uh we know we have a raft of rules as solicitors, but what kind of obligations does a person who is a party not a legal practitioner so they're not caught up by all of our ethical obligations and rules, but what are their obligations to a court when they're engaged So the first thing that you've probably got to think about is um is you've got to make sure that you disclose everything that is relevant to the issues in that case. So whether it be parent Um

you have to disclose all the things that are relevant. Now, that's a obviously a a tricky question because you're going to need to be guided by what your solicitor says because a lot of times the the client isn't going to know exactly what's relevant, what's not relevant because of as we all know, a client will think that a particular issue is relevant and we know that it's just not You know, they'll talk about the fact that someone had an affair. Well

It's not usually relevant. It's not it that's not sort of something that we're is is ordinarily going to be a Maybe a driver in terms of how you've got there, but it's not a consideration when you're dealing with arrangement. So it makes it sort of tricky, um, but that's where the your family lawyer will be able to help.

And in giving you ideas as to stuff that you know, they'll sort of say to you, you need to talk about things like practicalities of the time, if there's any a any risk of harm during these these times, who else is living in the house? um all these sorts of decisions and and factors that are that are going to come into it um that you need to be able to put forward and even things that It becomes very tricky if you have information that is going to work against you. Say for example

just trying to think of an example here. Um, you have you know that on one night you had a party and it was at your house and your kids were home and there was lots of swearing and there was a big fight broke out and Was drinking, there might have been some drugs or something like that involved. Yeah. You know, the other side doesn't know about. that becomes a bit of a tricky problem because you're sort of thinking, well, you don't know if they don't

But they might know. And the kids may have told. Sometimes it's better to disclose, fall on your sword, explain away. It takes the sting out of the out of the um disclosure before the other side gets to it. That's exactly right. The kids were fun. we can throw it. So so you can in fact take that sting out of it. So aside from

what your obligation is in terms of disclosing material matters that are relevant to the proceedings. So but if that's a property matter, well, you know, you don't have to fess up about that, I wouldn't have thought, unless Unless there's a a related kids issue. But as far as you know, it you that's why it's important to know what is the proceeding, what is it what is it relevant to. Yeah. So

That's the overarching deity. If you go to the rules again, we're talking about family law, so I'm only... Federal Circuit Family Court of Australia. But the general duty of disclosure is set out there as well. Each party to a proceeding has a duty to the court and to each other party. To give full and frank disclosure of all information relevant to the Yeah. Now I don't know how many times you will have written letters and received

Back and forth saying we've here's our disclosure, where's your disclosure? Or we're waiting for your disclosure, or we're trying to get our client to provide their disclosure. We spend a lot of time as lawyers going back and forth trying to ask our clients to

give us the information that we need and that they're obliged to provide and also then asking the other side for the same thing. I I've got a matter on at the moment where um my clients provided everything that that they have in their possession and we've had an absolute stone wall from a person stopped using a set of solicitors and is now self representing Yeah. We're in front of the court in a couple of weeks' time and next week we'll be filing our um there's a form called an un

think we can do. Um the person on the other side though, they won't be in good faith able to sign that. And if they do I'm gonna have I don't really want to do that. And then that's what happens is y uh you get caught up on these smaller issues which become big issues and all it does is stall the case and add extra cost

As a practitioner, I can't go giving legal advice to the other person, of course. I can go and say, please go and get some legal advice from You you have a duty under the court rules. Well you can write those letters as l yeah, or emails as long as you'd like. yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r So My duty is to say, here are the rules, look at them, please go and get legal advice and have your lawyer

I think that the duty of disclosure in relation to parenting matters is often overlooked. I think people don't realise what you know, they seem to think, Oh well

Um i what what d what they don't know won't hurt them. Um I think a lot of disclosure, when we talk about disclosure, a lot of lawyers will focus on the financial side of the proceedings. Yeah. Because it's something that is it it When you think about the concept of disclosure, you're thinking, oh I'm going to get some Something that I can To them. It's not like just sort of revealing information. Now there's a there's a fine line between A fair bit, depending on how

But often there's a fine line between disclosure and what we call interrogatories. Now that's basically it comes from the word interrogate. So It's basically uh the other s other solicitor or other loy uh other party um asking a series of questions that relate to um what has been put in evidence already or relate to some of these issues.

Now that's a different concept to disclosure as such, because sometimes It depends on the type of question, but sometimes you might have But generally you don't actually have to answer the questions that they put to you just because they've asked. So it's if you get a letter and you've you've disclosed everything and then they want to know a whole heap of um other questions about that, about what you've disclosed.

I'd probably go and speak to your lawyer or go and see a lawyer if you don't have one already, a family lawyer, and talk to them about whether or not you actually have to get put that information back out there. A lot of the time what they're asking for, A is not relevant and B it's not something that It's not your job to help their case. Your job is to inform the court of all the matters that are relevant to

to the facts that are in issue. And there's a fine line. So it's really care you just have to be careful, um, I think that when you get asked when you get a letter a series of questions how you respond to that. So, you know, because some lawyers mistake that and they say, well, I think that this is this is just a matter of disclosure. Well it's not. Not always. It rarely is. You know, um you have pe and and they'll use those answers because if you matter go

They'll use those answers later on, um po possibly against you to try and when they get a chance to cross examine you on on the case, on on all the evidence. So just be very careful with those. I mean w you have that general duty of disclosure of course is any information. It doesn't talk about documents, it talks about information.

And if it's relevant to the proceeding then these things that have happened to the children over this weekend that are serious and you haven't told anybody about it, well That's relevant. But If it's a parenting matter. If it's a parenting matter, yes right. Don't if it's a purely financial matter, you don't need Unless it has a bearing upon. How was it Sir Douglas Adams used to write about?

the fundamental interconnectedness of all things. So I should get um good advice from a lawyer before deciding whether you should or should not disclose something. And just because you get a ten page letter saying we want all of these fifty thousand pieces of paper

Don't necessarily think that you do have to provide all of that. Nope. Think about what's relevant to the proceedings, get some advice around it. Have a read of the rules. It's in part six of the rules and it sets out with some detail. I won't bore as anybody listening to this. with exactly what they are, but it it sets out pretty clearly the documents that you're supposed to provide in parenting and or five There's a couple of fact sheets too. Yeah.

Courts website again. I've said this before with the new website, there's a lot of useful information on there. Um and that's at let me just give you the website address. It's the F C F C O A gov.au. Um go there, have a look in the resources page. It's some really useful information. Lego is proud to sponsor. You'll be in safe hands with Alban Legal. For all your family law needs, call us on 071. double five six two zero triple four or visit our website at ARBENLIS.

Let's talk about some of the That we do get by way of disclosure, then. And you go, wow, I didn't know about this around this. And then the case finishes. We obviously as as practitioners we now know that it's not. And you have another case that pops up, maybe one of the parties in the old We can't use it.

We can't I I I um had a matter a number of years ago now where I acted for um We we got a uh I think a pretty solid outcome in in that, um made sure that there was sort of safety steady reintegration rather than everybody being thrust together after many years apart.

Ca after that all settled, I I was then reached out to by the what was then the ex wife of the former opponent, saying, Oh great, I'd like you to act for me and I th I Because I have too much information around that chat based upon my knowledge.

of the previous case and so much as I really w was intrigued and wanted to know more, I you know, I I liaised y you'll be pleased with the QLS, the Q Queas of Law Society, you just said And'cause the thing is too, so Yeah, so um Because remember that just because it's over um at the time you've got a consent order or a final order from a court or a binding financial agreement or There are still mechanisms of

for those orders to be overturned or those agreements to be set aside in the in the event of non disclosure or fraud or a whole range of different um things that could crop up. And so it's Could you imagine if you were acting for that ex wife and then she comes to you with this other um bit of information and then you think, Oh, that would have been handy to know, that probably would have changed my advice or

You can't do anything with it and you're conflicted, so you've just got to step away from the whole thing and just say, Sorry. Yep. Uh and and likewise if you have a client that says to you, Look, I've I've got all of this stuff, but I'm going I'm not going to tell her or him about it. And that's happened to me. I'm gone uh well, you've told me about it now and you've shown me this. I can't put something forward that's untruth.

I don't have to communicate directly, but I'm telling you your obligation is to put everything out on the table there's what you've got. And if you're telling me you're not going to do that and you want me to hide it, I can't because we come back to our fundamental rule which is You and I as as officers of the court owe our primary duty to the court and to the administration of justice. Five morning.

partake in any disreputable conduct or dishonest conduct or anything like that It's going to Yeah. Here's the takeaway from this, if you're going to get up to something thoroughly no good, then certainly don't try to embroil your solicitory about it. No, that's right, because all they're going to do is say that oh we can't act for you now. Thank you for that.

If you have a solicitor that goes, Yeah, that's fine, let's let's you know, puts their arm around you and you s come up with some skullduggerous plan yeah they they probably won't be practicing for very long. No. So it's it's a bit like um well it's it's slightly different to For example, a a criminal lawyer. And so when you you know, if you've you've got a client says So y in that situation you can technically still act for them but what you can't

He or she didn't do it. Yeah. So you have to be so careful in that s situation. But in family law it's a bit different because How are we meant to prepare like for example about When we know that there's a bank account. We can't do that because we we're putting forward at that position. So that's why they're We simply can't represent somebody that wants to do that. That's right. So we we just can't do that. Um, same with parenting.

I find that um if it's the case that the the parent has told you that they're because they're not handling it or whatever the case may be. If you know that they that you're aware of these things. Um, it really m does become problematic because you can't say that it's necessarily that's in the best interest of the children to Stay with someone when you know that they are at risk.

Well, i it's actually one of the exceptions. I mean we we have a duty of confidentiality to I know that you know this, I'm just sort of talking out there. We have a duty of confidentiality to our clients not to disclose information they give us in a com in within that solicitor client relationship. There is an exception that's written in the rules though, and that is if there is a risk of serious physical harm to somebody then we we can

proper authorities. So if you're apprehending my client is going to do something dreadful and drastic and I really genuinely believe Step up and act on that. Um it's a weird thing. I mean I can remember many eons ago in in an To do with a Canadian case where a person had disclosed to their lawyer, Oh, yeah, I I did kill somebody. And of course th that's no imminent risk of harm. So they are charged with that knowledge. Oh, that's is it the Alton Logan thing?

Oh, you may be right. Yeah, I I can't remember the name of it. A long time ago. But the the lawyer ended up saying letting you know, letting the information out of the bag. Oh actually no I don't think they're gonna be a good one. trouble because they breached their ethical obligations. So the the family of the of the of the victims

But the lawyer also it destroyed their career because they breached the rules about disposing confidential information. So it's you know it's a bit of a mindful look, that's an exceptionally rare case. But sometimes You do you you are charged with information.

Um, the lawyer has their duty of confidence to their clients, so they can't they can't breach the confidentiality um in relation to things that have already happened. So that example I just gave where the client says to you I have already Um that to me says, well Not it's not that you can breach confidentiality by Mm there's an obligation, there's a mandatory um

There's a section in the criminal code in Queensland, um, it's fairly new actually, for failure to report. So if that was sexual abuse of kids, there's a I can't remember what the offence is, but it's anyway, it's fail failing to report it to an authority. If you're aware of having There's sexual abuse going on with kids. Yeah. Then you have So um but in terms of it's it's not necessarily you know, the the lawyer doesn't have to be a whistleblower

client and in fact they have to maintain that that confidence. But what they can't do is then continue to put forward a case that the kids are not or have not been harmed or are at not at risk in your in that person's care because that's the biggest problem I Um, you know, that's consistent with your duty to the court and being, you know, not misleading the court and um ensuring that But of course, as family lawyers, in parents.

People forget, but our our job is actually to guide our clients. Not it's not a one hundred percent everything you say and want, we're going to put that forward as being the right thing. We we have to balance that with our obligations to the court and weirdly to our clients to say

Your best interests are served by seeking, you know, for the law to be upheld in terms of how it works out what the best interests are. Not necessarily you saying, I insist that they stay with me because he strokes she's a monster. Yeah. Yeah. I think it I think it is um yeah the takeaway, be careful what you say to your lawyer'cause they Well yeah, it it may it may create an ethical quandary for them. Yeah. But I mean of course you had that matter not very long ago where

were effectively talking somebody off a ledge. They were in the That's right. Very dark place. Um unfortunately that they are okay now, but they were in a very dark place and that put puts you in an awkward position. You think everything's gonna be okay but You can't really know. Um and some we've had the you know, the boy cried wolf you know scenario that we saw

And that happens too. Sometimes people will say, Oh, that's it, I'm going to end it all, it's also emotion. And if you don't know that person, which you wouldn't do personally, I have to report this on the other. That's right. The longer you get to know them you go, It's all right, it's is it the is it the weekly clarion call if they're going to do something terrible? Yeah. And that what you know, it starts to ameliorate over time.

At each on each occasion we have to think about it separately. Do I need to do report? Anyway, that's all Deep include. Let's uh th think a little bit more about some of our other obligations. Say w we do a lot of mediations you and I. Um fixing up property settlements, stopping people from um spending eons of time and money in court. They're confidential.

So we go along and we say, This is what I want and this is why I want it and the other side And at some point the mediators will usually say, Now I'll only tell them things Yeah. The th we have this this sort of artificiality, don't we, which is it's a confidential and it's a privileged process, the the mediation. But you it once you've relayed that information, you don't get to unknow it. That's right. I actually did a paper when I was doing my in dispute resolution or something, one of those.

Um, and I did a paper and I called it Unsee This. And I actually covered that precise issue um about just that whole the psychology behind um trying to not know something and it's very difficult. not to use it. Um but the problem of course is that once you know it, there are obviously some ways that you can go about getting that information, um, which might have you might have done anyway.

even though you you know, i even without the mediation, you might have so that you might have been um concerned or um that there was a another bank Yeah. Joe Bloggs hasn't um once paid a phone bill. There's no no Telstra Optus Vodafone, no no record whatsoever of any phone bill or anything like that.

And so you're thinking, oh, okay, but there's a lot of transfers to this unrecognised number. So you sort of think, okay, what what is this number? So you might want to subpoena, issue a subpoena anyway. But during the course of the mediation you find out, Oh well, actually there's a few other bits and pieces and that he's not c you know, that he's spending all this sort of money and

that he does plan on on buying investments and all that sort of stuff. So you you're working out little bits and pieces without him actually saying that he's you know, that there is this other account. So he hasn't actually said that, but you've worked out because of his intentions of what he's going to do and you sort of w you look at it and you go Det must be something else.

There's something else going on. So you learn that at the mediation'cause it sort of backs up what you're already thinking. Um So there are ways that you can try and get that information in a legal way. Um but you can't necessarily just write back to them say, Your client said that they're going to do this, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah and and therefore we're going to seek an injunction restraining you from doing Because that is directly from the mediation and you you know, you can't use that.

No, but you still know it. You still know it, that's exactly right. Oh and it's that these conflicts that sort of that that arise, I mean we have that as a conflict with in terms of the confidential information that you've got. Yep. Um a big topic that pops up in any ethics kind of um one oh one is conflicts of interest. Yeah. So

Give me a quick... Thirty second guide us at what is a conflict of interest. Okay. When your client's interests conflicts with either your own or the interests of another client or another So you've got... And we then can't act. If there is a conflict of interest, we as solicitors and barristers have to say sorry, can't help. We may have, for example, given advice to that person in the past.

We may have acted for them. And sometimes the youth the nature of the acting might be you'd think not very relevant, but even if it's got some tangential relevance. It can still preclude you from acting and the QLS and all the ethical guidelines would say if in doubt There's been some recent decisions in the family law. field though in relation to'cause It happens a lot in family law. Um, where there's injunctions trying to get people Stopping lawyers from representation.

Um but what what the common theme is is that it has to be a real act. It's not just a oh well someone might not they might feel that there's an unfair advantage or something like that. I've sat down and I've told this person everything that's been going on and they've given me advice and then Yeah, it's Mike. So it might be, for example, that you've acted on a conveyance, like a family lawyer. Some plenty of famil family lawyers do both conveyancing and family law. I know I don't either. Not me.

Cảm ơn các bạn đã theo dõi và hẹn gặp lại. That's all she she takes care of all of that at QC Law. I'll give a shameless. Um anyway and so she um will do all that for me. But in terms of if you were uh and then the person who wants to come to you and because often you'll you'll might have sold it might be husband and wife as being the sellers um and the wife might have only ever really had any

Dealings with your firm in coming and signing the transfer. That's it. But you've technically acted that's not necessarily going to be enough for a conflict for that family law firm to for the that family lawyer to So Th the the nature of the information that they have, you know, would it would it make a difference? Sorry. the the solicitor's rules is whether it be material to the matter of another client. So do have a matter at the moment actually with a client who

and her ex used a particular firm to sell a property together and that firm now holds the money in their trust account and they now act for the husband and we act for the wife. But they there really wasn't any confidential information. It was s as a simple property transaction. I'm happy at this juncture to to rely upon that. But I have put them on notice that if they do have Yeah.

And if your solicitor has acted for the other party th they they will do a conflict of interest check at the start of a case. Yeah. I was talking to someone recently and um immediately And they don't do any mediation. for parents who have kids that go to the same school. um as their as their kids. And it's not it's not that it's a conflict as such, but it's awkward. And so I I adopt a similar principle. So I try not to act for parents who that are within the same school as as my kids.

Only because it does become very awkward and There is a It's not that it's a conflict now, but there is a potential for some conflict to happen later on. And as lawyers, we have to avoid we we need to uh be conscious of not just the actual conflict but also potent things that can be a conflict. in the future. So that we just gotta be very careful of that. So if you're if your family lawyer says, Look, I'd probably prefer that you know

that well what I often do I say, Alex, can you act for this client? Um so that's probably the best way Yes I I I have I have acted once but the other it was in such a low capacity for such a short period of time it made no And the per the other person concerned was I But I would avoid like generally like you. It's far too close to home and it creates not just the conflict but maybe sort of social difference.

concern down the track. Yeah. So if your solicitor says, I'm sorry, I can't act for you, don't necessarily take it personally. There could be a very good reason for that. Um Look, ethics is a whole range of of questions around what you should and shouldn't do and as Liza said at the very start, it's about you know, where does the law see the moral compass of behaviour?

We have rules and we have protocols that we follow. There are duties that are imposed upon people going through court and upon their legal practitioners. So ask any questions that you might want to, drop us any emails that you like. Um we could keep rambling about cases that we've dealt with for a long time, but maybe today's not the day we've probably exhausted your ears. So thank you very much for listening to forward to you joining us in the future