10 March 2009
Tuesday Transcript: Nice Catch
GUMMOW J: Thank you. The Court has before it now three summonses… We will consider first Mr Smith’s motion of summons. We also received detailed written submissions which we have digested. Now, is there anything you want to say in furtherance of the written submissions?
MR SMITH: Simply this. As it would be obvious from the submissions in a sense the summons has been filed out of a sense of neurotic caution. It is pretty clear that any file - - -
GUMMOW J: Neutotic caution?
MR SMITH: Neurotic caution, yes.
HAYNE J: That will make an interesting catchword, I think, in the reasons.
I quite enjoy seeing an “interesting” catchword whilst buried in the law reports, but alas, “neurotic caution” didn’t make the cut.
There was a recent decision in which Justice McKechnie dismissed a conspiracy theorist’s claim and warned delicately of the “dangers of self-litigation”.
To my mind, though, the best “interesting” catchword belong to Justice Heerey, who was concerned that counsel regularly neglected relevant legislation:
INDUSTRIAL LAW — appeal from Federal Magistrates Court — whether error in finding employer applied duress to employee in connection with Australian Workplace Agreement
EVIDENCE — proper application of Briginshaw principle — isn’t there something in the Evidence Act about this?
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE — adequate reasons for judgment
Turns out there is, in section 140 — and given how widely the catchword were circulated, I doubt Justice Heerey will need to point it out again.
Seen a more interesting catchword? Let us know in the comments thread.
Related posts:
- Tuesday Transcript: Pipe Down
- Tuesday Transcript: Know Your Teabag
- Tuesday Transcript: Reality-based decision-making
- Tuesday Transcript: Kirby the Urbane
- Tuesday Transcript: High Court TV reviews
