1. Introduction and Ethical standpoint
The recommended approach to be pursued will be contrary to Richard and Bridget, it shall be to argue a ‘no fault or negligence’ exception for Samantha and to adopt Natalie’s information as admissible evidence to present a relationship of trust between Natalie and her coach Elizabeth. During engagement as an officer of the court ASCR 4.1.5 provides the ASCR and relevant law must be adhered to. As a guideline to the mindset behind the approach adopted, the form of lawyer adopted shall be the ‘responsible lawyer’ as stated in Inside Lawyers’ Ethics as ‘focusing on the lawyers role as an officer of the court…….. has an overriding duty to maintain justice’
This provides a mindset of being an officer of …show more content…
Therefore a morally right act results in a good outcome and a morally wrong at results in consequences. Delving deeper into Consequentialism, a utilitarian approach is also adopted, this contrasts with egoism. Modern utilitarianism is defined by its founder Jeremy Bentham as ‘it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong’. In pursuing the client’s best interests it shall also be in the best interest of the greatest number as it may influence a change in the WADA’s punitive nature and also assist her teammate’s case, therefore the greatest good for the greatest …show more content…
This is an issue as outlined in White Industries Pty Ltd per Goldberg J: ‘….Court resources are finite and so are the resources of most litigants, and the court should not countenance a deliberate strategy of obstruction and delay.’ Ensuring the risk of candour was minimized emphasizes the role of a ‘responsible lawyer’ enforcing a duty to the court.
The subsequent issue to consider is the admissibility of the phone call by ‘Penny. ‘Penny’ requested anonymity though claimed to be a member of the Eagles. Two issues must be considered, the admissibility of ‘Penny’s’ evidence and the actions to be taken on ‘Penny’s’ information.
3. Actions to be taken on ‘Penny’s’
The recommended approach to be pursued will be contrary to Richard and Bridget, it shall be to argue a ‘no fault or negligence’ exception for Samantha and to adopt Natalie’s information as admissible evidence to present a relationship of trust between Natalie and her coach Elizabeth. During engagement as an officer of the court ASCR 4.1.5 provides the ASCR and relevant law must be adhered to. As a guideline to the mindset behind the approach adopted, the form of lawyer adopted shall be the ‘responsible lawyer’ as stated in Inside Lawyers’ Ethics as ‘focusing on the lawyers role as an officer of the court…….. has an overriding duty to maintain justice’
This provides a mindset of being an officer of …show more content…
Therefore a morally right act results in a good outcome and a morally wrong at results in consequences. Delving deeper into Consequentialism, a utilitarian approach is also adopted, this contrasts with egoism. Modern utilitarianism is defined by its founder Jeremy Bentham as ‘it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong’. In pursuing the client’s best interests it shall also be in the best interest of the greatest number as it may influence a change in the WADA’s punitive nature and also assist her teammate’s case, therefore the greatest good for the greatest …show more content…
This is an issue as outlined in White Industries Pty Ltd per Goldberg J: ‘….Court resources are finite and so are the resources of most litigants, and the court should not countenance a deliberate strategy of obstruction and delay.’ Ensuring the risk of candour was minimized emphasizes the role of a ‘responsible lawyer’ enforcing a duty to the court.
The subsequent issue to consider is the admissibility of the phone call by ‘Penny. ‘Penny’ requested anonymity though claimed to be a member of the Eagles. Two issues must be considered, the admissibility of ‘Penny’s’ evidence and the actions to be taken on ‘Penny’s’ information.
3. Actions to be taken on ‘Penny’s’