Annual Review 2002 - Committees
Chief Justice’s Policy and Planning Committee
Rule Committee
Supreme Court Education Committee
Supreme Court Building Committee
Supreme Court Information Technology Committee
Alternative Dispute Resolution Steering Committee
Jury Task Force
Supreme Court Commercial List Users’ Group
Supreme Court Corporations List Users’ Group
Supreme Court Probate Users’ Group
Supreme Court Equity Liaison Group
Common Law Criminal Users’ Committee
Common Law Civil Users’ Committee
Court of Criminal Appeal and Crime Registry Users’ Group
Media Group
CHIEF JUSTICE’S POLICY AND PLANNING COMMITTEE
Purpose
The Committee, chaired by the Chief Justice, meets monthly to determine high level strategic policy to be adopted by the Court in relation to its operations and consider matters on which its view has been sought, particularly in relation to procedural or administrative changes likely to affect the Court and its operations.
Work in 2002
The Committee dealt with a range of issues concerning the operation of the Court. An important area of attention was caseload management. Particular topics discussed included refinement of time standards, application of Acting Judge resources and the use of mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution.
In relation to technology, the Committee discussed the Court’s application of video conferencing and considered operational aspects of the CourtLink system, particularly in relation to the accessibility of court records.
Members during 2002
The Honourable the Chief Justice (Chairperson)
The Honourable the President
The Honourable Justice Handley AO
The Honourable Justice Giles
The Honourable Justice Hodgson (January to April)
The Honourable Justice Wood AO
The Honourable Mr Justice Young (from May)
Mrs N Johnston
Secretary: Ms J Weske.
RULE COMMITTEE
Purpose
The Rule Committee is a statutory body and has the power to alter, add to or rescind any of the rules governing the Supreme Court contained in, or made under, the Supreme Court Act 1970.
The Committee constantly monitors the operation of the Supreme Court Rules with a view to increasing efficiency and reducing cost and delay so far as is consistent with the requirements of access to justice. For this purpose the Committee receives and considers proposals for change from its own members (who represent all Divisions of the Court and the legal profession) as well as senior Court staff.
The Committee has nine members comprising seven Judges of the Court, one practising barrister and one practising solicitor. Mr Steven Jupp (Manager, Court Services) performs the role of Secretary to the Committee. He is assisted by the Advisings Officer, Mr Nicholas Flaskas.
The Committee usually meets monthly. In between those meetings detailed work is done by the Secretary and the Advisings Officer, who consult with individual members and non-members where necessary, and by individual members and sub-committees.
Work in 2002
During the year the Committee made 15 substantive amendments to the Supreme Court Rules. Some of the more significant amendments were:
• streamlining the Court of Criminal Appeal Rules to accommodate more efficient procedures and timely appeals on conviction or sentence from the court of trial
• further extending the power of Registrars to carry out duties formerly restricted to Judges and Masters: namely, dismissal of matters and the power to make costs orders in the Possession List
• extending to criminal trials the rules relating to conferences between expert witnesses that previously applied only in civil trials.
Members during 2002
The Honourable the Chief Justice (Chairperson)
The Honourable the President
The Honourable Justice Hodgson
The Honourable Mr Justice Young
The Honourable Mr Justice James
The Honourable Justice Hamilton
The Honourable Justice Bergin
Mr P L Johnstone (Law Society of NSW – from 8 July)
Ms R McColl SC (NSW Bar Association)
Mr N Meagher (Law Society of NSW – until 7 July)
Secretary: Mr S Jupp.
SUPREME COURT EDUCATION COMMITTEE
Purpose
The Supreme Court Education Committee is responsible for the continuing education of Judges and Masters of the Court. It meets from time to time to arrange the Annual Conference and to consider topics of possible relevance for the Committee. The Committee takes into account the desirability of inviting speakers for the Conference from within and outside the Court.
Work in 2002
The Court’s Annual Conference was held at Peppers Fairmont Resort, Leura, from 16 to 18 August 2002. The Honourable Margaret Marshall, Chief Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court, Massachusetts USA, gave the keynote address – Scandalizing the Court: Must we Muzzle the Press to Preserve our Independence? Her husband, Mr Anthony Lewis, a New York Times journalist, provided the commentary to Justice Levine’s presentation Does our Defamation Law Strike the Right Balance? Other topics included Corporate Collapse in Australia: the Role and Implications for Accounting presented by Associate Professor Jim Psaros, University of Newcastle, and a paper on Equitable Damages / Compensation given by Professor Charles Rickett, University of Auckland.
Members during 2002
The Honourable Justice Handley AO (Chairperson)
The Honourable Justice Giles
The Honourable Justice Santow OAM
The Honourable Mr Justice Studdert
The Honourable Justice David Kirby
The Honourable Justice Austin
The Honourable Justice Virginia Bell (from December)
The Honourable Justice Gzell (from December)
Master McLaughlin
Mrs N Johnston
Ms J Weske (until December)
Ms B Papazoglou (from December)
Secretary: Ms R Windeler (Education Director, Judicial Commission of NSW).
SUPREME COURT BUILDING COMMITTEE
Purpose
The Committee provides advice to the Chief Justice on all matters affecting the buildings within the Darlinghurst court complex, the King Street and St James Road courts and the Law Courts Building in Phillip Street. The Committee makes recommendations concerning maintenance and restoration work to be carried out, determines priorities and monitors the work programs.
The Committee also identifies facilities that are required to best support courtroom operations, such as cabling to enable computer access by judicial officers and parties to proceedings and access to remote witness facilities in Australia and overseas.
Work in 2002
Court security was an important focus for the Committee this year. In particular the Committee developed policies and strategies to ensure the safety and security of Court users, judicial officers and staff as well as the security of buildings and other assets.
Another major focus of activity was the building and renovation program at King Street that will see the provision of enhanced courtroom resources. In dealing with this issue the Committee sought to provide enhanced mediation facilities in the King Street complex.
Members during 2002
The Honourable Mr Justice Sheller (Chairperson)
The Honourable Justice Giles
The Honourable Justice Wood AO
The Honourable Mr Justice Dunford
Mrs N Johnston
Mr W Brown (Capital Works, Attorney General’s Department)
Mr G Donnelly (Law Courts Limited)
Mr B Johnson (Capital Works, Attorney General’s Department – until September)
Ms D Jones (Peddle Thorp & Walker – from September)
Secretary: Ms J Weske.
SUPREME COURT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
Purpose
The Chief Justice invested the Supreme Court Information Technology Committee in 1997 with the responsibility of assessing the information technology needs of judicial officers and their staff, and reviewing the implementation of IT services.
Work during 2002
Practice Note No 105 (Use of Technology in Civil Litigation) was reviewed. Improved technology, the experience of the Court and practitioners since the issue of Practice Note No 105, and the experience of courts in other States, such as Victoria, suggested a need to review the Practice Note. A draft amended Practice Note is currently being considered by members of the legal community before being reviewed for issue by the Chief Justice.
Problems were identified with the layout of the current Caselaw coversheet, which was not adequately facilitating research tasks. A sub-committee, consisting of the Court’s researchers and associates, members of the Law Courts Library and the Supreme Court’s IT Manager, reviewed the coversheet. The sub-committee considered a report on the possible impact of the electronic data language XML and suggestions from the Australian Legal Information Index (AustLII), from members of the legal community visiting the Law Courts Library, as well as from judicial officers and staff. A proposal to change the order of information in the coversheet to improve research efficiency and to add other necessary data was adopted and will be implemented next year.
An increase in the number (to 16) of judicial officers utilising voice recognition software was approved by the Committee. Some training was provided by the Department’s Information Technology Services unit. However, no specialised training is available and the training needs of users of the system require further assessment.
The Word template used by judicial officers to prepare judgments had been amended significantly at the request of the Committee in late 2001 and early 2002. A standard template is now used for each of the four jurisdictions (Equity, Common Law, Court of Appeal and Court of Criminal Appeal). The Committee monitored the progress of these improvements.
Several issues arose during the course of the year regarding the level of Helpdesk services and the manner of provision of those services. Certain of these issues arose after changes to the provision of these services by the Attorney General’s Department. These issues have given rise to ongoing discussions between the Court and the Department to ensure that an appropriate level of service is provided to the Court given the nature of the Court’s jurisdiction.
Members during 2002
The Honourable Justice Margaret Beazley (Chairperson)
The Honourable Justice Carolyn Simpson
The Honourable Justice Clifford Einstein
Master Macready
Mrs N Johnston
Mr W Cellich (Information Technology Services, Attorney General’s Department - from August)
Mr R Cox (Information Technology Services, Attorney General’s Department - until August)
Ms L O’Loughlin (Law Courts Library)
Mr T Stacey (Information Technology Services, Attorney General’s Department - until January)
Secretary: Mr B Warden
Additional occasional representatives:
Ms V O’Meara (Law Courts Library)
Mr J Taggart (Information Technology Services, Attorney General’s Department).
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION STEERING COMMITTEE
Purpose
The work of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (or ADR) Steering Committee is guided by the following objectives:
• encouraging use of ADR and particularly mediation as an option for solving disputes to be explored before court proceedings
• establishing long-term ADR structures annexed to the Court, with emphasis on mediation
• considering matters of policy such as accreditation, funding, training and the like and making appropriate recommendations to the Chief Justice
• liaison with other courts within Australia operating court-annexed ADR schemes with a view to developing common policy as to matters of training and accreditation and to establish structures for exchange of information and the mutual monitoring of programs.
The successful pursuit of these objectives should help to reduce unacceptable case backlogs.
Work in 2002
The Committee held six ordinary meetings during 2002. Additionally it held meetings with representatives of the Australian Commercial Disputes Centre (ACDC) and LEADR.
The Committee’s most significant work during this year has been to finalise a package of proposals to streamline referrals to mediation. The various proposals are under consideration by the Chief Justice and the Attorney General and include a draft for a new mediation practice note and proposals for amendments to the Supreme Court Act and the Supreme Court Rules.
The proposed practice note contains a broad-based mediation referral protocol that was developed through extensive consultation with key mediation bodies (the NSW Bar Association, Law Society of NSW, Institute of Arbitrators and Mediators Australia, ACDC and LEADR). It should assist Judges when they consider that proceedings should be sent to mediation without the consent of one or all of the parties and, if the parties cannot or will not appoint a mediator, to order that the protocol apply so that an appropriately qualified mediator be appointed by a key mediation body. The protocol also includes a provision for the Court to request, in appropriate cases, that mediation bodies consider reduction or waiver of fees. The Committee is grateful for the work done by Mr Robert Angyal of the NSW Bar Association in preparing the initial draft of the protocol.
As foreshadowed last year and arising from continued lack of use of the list of evaluators, the proposed legislative and rule amendments include removal of references to neutral evaluation. For mediation, the proposals provide a mechanism for referral to qualified mediators directly through nominated mediation bodies, without need for the Chief Justice to maintain lists of suitable persons. This would significantly reduce the administrative burden that has developed for mediation organisations and the Court in maintaining and reviewing those lists.
The Court of Appeal took up a recommendation made last year by the Committee and conducted a pilot mediation program during 2002 and provided the Committee with regular reports on outcomes.
The Committee also received reports on outcomes for cases that were accepted into the Law Society’s Settlement Week program. The latest available figures indicate that Supreme Court cases made up more than half of the overall success rate of the program, which is a credit to the efforts of Registry staff, who identified 2447 suitable cases for notification of the program and dispatched over 5000 letters to parties inviting participation.
The Court’s in-house mediation program continues to accommodate an average of four to five mediations per week. The Committee is of the view that unless two suites of dedicated mediation rooms can be appropriately restored for use at King Street, there is little capacity for the Court to expand its mediation program.
Due to his increasing workload, Justice Wood retired from the Committee in April, noting that the Common Law Division continued to be well represented. His significant contribution to ADR policy through many years on the Committee is warmly acknowledged. Ms Jeannie Highet remains, as ever, the backbone of the ADR Steering Committee.
Members during 2002
The Honourable Mr Justice Sheller (Chairperson)
The Honourable Justice Wood AO (until 17 April)
The Honourable Justice John Bryson
The Honourable Mr Justice Studdert
The Honourable Justice Greg James
Master Harrison
Mrs N Johnston
Mr G Berecry
Secretary: Ms J Highet.
JURY TASK FORCE
Purpose
The Task Force was formed by the Chief Justice in 1992 to examine and report on matters relating to the welfare and well being of jurors. The Task Force considers any matters relating to juries and jury service referred to it by the Chief Justice, a head of jurisdiction, the Attorney General, the Director General of the Attorney General’s Department or the Chief Judge of the Common Law Division of the Supreme Court.
Work in 2002
The Task Force held regular meetings in 2002. Significant matters of jury law reform were considered, including:
• jurors with disabilities - the Task Force is awaiting the NSW Law Reform Commission’s report on this topic
• amendment to the Jury Act 1977 to allow the Sheriff to disclose the identity of a juror in the event of jury tampering - the Task Force continues to monitor this issue
• exemptions from jury service - nurses have been made exempt from jury service
• a proposal from the NSW Attorney General’s Department seeking the Task Force’s support for a research project studying juror attitudes - the Task Force agreed to support this project
• a jury research seminar - Professor Michael Chesterman has provided a report to the Task Force on this issue
• possible prosecutions for breaches
of the Jury Act 1977 - the Task Force continually monitors this issue
• reserve jurors - this issue has been referred to the NSW Law Reform Commission.
The Task Force also continues to monitor issues surrounding juror fees and payment, jury management and juror support systems. The Task Force considered the draft of a juror handbook prepared by the Sheriff for use by empanelled jurors. A copy of the final handbook was provided to the Task Force and noted. A survey of jurors was completed and a report will be tabled
in early 2003.
The Task Force formed a sub-committee to carry out inspections of jury facilities throughout the Supreme and District Courts in early 2003.
Members during 2002
The Honourable Justice Greg James (Chairperson)
His Honour Judge Shadbolt (District Court of NSW)
Ms J Weske (until 22 November)
Ms L Anamourlis (Office of the Sheriff)
Ms J Atkinson (Legislative and Policy Division, Attorney General’s Department - from 22 May)
Mr R Cox (Management Services, Attorney General’s Department)
Mr C Enemark (Legislative and Policy Division, Attorney General’s Department - from 22 May)
Mr B Kelly (Sheriff of NSW)
Secretary: Mr R Escott.
The Task Force thanks Ms Weske for the outstanding service she performed as part of the Jury Task Force and wishes her every success in her new position.
SUPREME COURT COMMERCIAL LIST USERS’ GROUP
Purpose
The purpose of the Commercial List Users’ Group is to provide a forum for discussion amongst Judges who sit in the Commercial List and/or the Technology and Construction List and legal practitioners who commonly practise in those lists.
Work in 2002
The Group met on 8 August and 5 December. Amongst the matters considered were:
• matters of procedure and practice in relation to the Commercial List and the Technology and Construction List
• compulsory mediation
• the need, if any, for a revised approach to the tender of expert evidence
• the need for revision of Practice
Note No 100
• procedures necessary to ensure compliance by all parties with directions requiring the preparation of matters for hearing in a timely manner
• ongoing difficulties of managing discovery in an efficient and cost effective manner.
Members during 2002
The Honourable Justice McClellan (Chairperson)
The Honourable Justice Clifford Einstein
The Honourable Justice Bergin
The Honourable Justice Gzell
Legal profession representatives:
Mr T F Bathurst QC
Mr D J Hammerschlag SC
Mr N C Hutley SC
Mr R B S MacFarlan QC
Mr G T W Miller QC
Mr S D Rares SC
Mr M G Rudge SC
Mr R M Smith SC
Mr R Drinnan
Ms L Johnson
Mr R Johnston
Mr H Keller
Mr D Kemp
Mr S Lewis
Mr G McClellan
Mr S McDonald
Mr R Schaffer
Mr G Standen
Mr S Westgarth (Ms S C S de Jersey as alternate).
SUPREME COURT CORPORATIONS LIST USERS’ GROUP
Purpose
The purpose of the Corporations List Users’ Group is to provide a forum for discussion amongst judicial officers and legal practitioners of matters related to the Court’s Corporations List and to assist the Court to ensure that the Corporations List is conducted in a fair and efficient manner.
Work in 2002
The Group met quarterly during 2002, reviewing various aspects of the Court’s work in corporations matters, including the following:
• reviewing some new arrangements for the efficient conduct of liquidators’ examinations
• proposing and introducing a new practice for “short call-over” of the Corporations List
• considering various proposals for changes to the Corporations Rules, including changes relating to disclosure of the remuneration rates of insolvency practitioners.
Members during 2002
The Honourable Justice Austin (Chairperson)
The Honourable Justice Barrett (Secretary)
The judicial officers of the Equity Division
The Registrar in Equity
Legal profession representatives:
Mr M Oakes SC
Mr J Johnson
Ms L Johnson
Mr C (Robert) Newlinds
Ms D Searle
Mr J Thomson
Other members:
Ms L Macaulay (Australian Securities and Investments Commission)
Mr H Parsons (Insolvency Practitioners Association of Australia)
Ms J Redfern (Australian Securities and Investments Commission)
Mr K Rennie (Ernst & Young).
SUPREME COURT PROBATE USERS’ GROUP
Purpose
The Group is a forum for discussing and addressing matters of concern or interest in the operation of the Court’s Probate Registry, making suggestions for improved practices and processes and discussing and addressing concerns or interests in probate matters and deceased estates generally.
Work in 2002
The group generally meets quarterly. The issues discussed by the group during 2002 included:
• whether grants of administration of deceased estates should be made to persons outside Australia
• whether original wills should be required for probate applications
• representations by the Trustee Companies Association concerning probate procedures for filing of inventories of estate property and advertising notice of intention to apply for probate
• electronic filing of court documents
• replacement of the three separate forms of probate caveats with a single form of probate caveat
• limitation periods for commencement of proceedings under the Family Provision Act 1982 and protection of executors where such proceedings have been brought after publication of notice under section 35 of that Act.
As a result of its discussions the Committee resolved not to support the representations of the Trustee Companies Association and that the current practices of the Court in respect of grants of administration and original wills should continue. The recommendation of the Committee that the three different forms of caveat be replaced by a single form of caveat was adopted by the Rule Committee of the Court during the year.
Members during 2002
The Honourable Mr Justice Young (Chairperson until 23 April)
The Honourable Mr Justice Windeyer AM RFD ED (Chairperson from 23 April)
Mrs N Johnston
Mr J Finlay
Mr P Studdert (Secretary)
Professor R Atherton (Macquarie University, representing NSW law schools)
Ms R Edenborough (Perpetual Trustee Company, representing corporate trustees)
Mr R Neal (Law Society of NSW)
Mr P Whitehead (Public Trustee NSW)
Mr M Willmott (NSW Bar Association).
SUPREME COURT EQUITY LIAISON GROUP
Purpose
This Group commenced during 2001 and met quarterly during 2002. The Group was established to promote discourse between the legal profession and representatives of the Equity Division upon matters of interest and importance to the operation of the Division. The Group has no constitution; it is relatively informal and might be called a “listening group”. The Judges expect the legal profession representatives to tell them candidly what concerns the profession may have about the performance of the Division. The information is received on the basis that no offence will be taken and no recriminations will be had. Likewise the Judges will inform the practitioners of any conduct or practice which appears to them to be detracting from the efficiency of the Court.
Work in 2002
The work of this Group comes on an ad hoc basis. It focuses on the way the Equity Division lists are performing and what improvements might be made in the light of prevailing conditions.
In 2002, a Master was appointed as an Acting Judge, and the Registrar as an Acting Master. This led the Group in the latter part of the year to consider alternative structuring for the Registrar’s lists and alternative arrangements for disposal of matters in those lists.
Members during 2002
The Honourable Mr Justice Young
The Honourable Justice Bergin
Legal profession representatives:
Mr R Forster QC
Mr B Miller
Mr C (Robert) Newlinds.
COMMON LAW CRIMINAL USERS’ COMMITTEE
Purpose
The Committee provides a forum for discussing and addressing matters of concern or interest in the administration of the Court’s criminal trial workload.
Work in 2002
The Committee generally meets quarterly. Matters discussed during the year included:
• case management processes
• listing issues and reserve trials delays
• proposed procedural changes
• access to exhibits and court files by non-parties
• pre-trial disclosure
• facilities for legal practitioners.
Members during 2002
The Honourable Justice Wood AO (Chairperson)
The Honourable Justice Graham Barr
Mr T Game SC (Mr P Boulten as alternate)
Mr P Zahra SC (Senior Public Defender)
Mr P Barrett (Crown Prosecutor’s Chambers)
Mr C Craigie (Public Defenders Office)
Ms K Cull (Law Society of NSW)
Mr R Ellis (Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions)
Mr D Humphreys (Legal Aid Commission of NSW)
Mr R Kozanecki (Legal Aid Commission of NSW)
Ms P Wright (solicitor).
COMMON LAW CIVIL USERS’ COMMITTEE
Purpose
The Committee provides a forum for discussing and addressing matters of concern or interest in the administration of the Court’s civil trial workload.
Work in 2002
The Committee generally meets quarterly. Matters discussed during the year included:
• case management
• listing practice and delays
• specialist lists
• jury issues
• circuit hearings.
Members during 2002
The Honourable Justice Wood AO (Chairperson)
The Honourable Justice Anthony Whealy
Legal profession representatives:
Mr B Murray QC (Mr W H Nicholas QC as alternate)
Ms M Curran
Ms N Goodman
Mr P Johnstone (Ms A Sullivan as alternate).
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL AND CRIME REGISTRY USERS’ GROUP
Purpose
The Group was established in 2001 following concerns expressed by the Chief Justice relating to delays in having matters ready for hearing in the Court of Criminal Appeal.
The aims of the Group are to:
• identify factors impacting on the progress of matters in the Court of Criminal Appeal
• explore strategies to promote early readiness for hearing
• facilitate open and effective communication amongst agencies
• identify factors impacting on agencies’ work
• explore strategies promoting good practices.
Work in 2002
The Group met four times during the year. Matters discussed during the year included:
• the Criminal Legislation Amendment Bill 2001 [Amendment of Criminal Appeal Act 1912]
• results of a review undertaken by
the Group’s Secretary to identify reasons for delays in the Court of Criminal Appeal
• quality assurance mechanisms for District Court associates
• electronic transcripts
• waiver of Court fees for legally-
aided clients
• use of mobile phones in correctional centres.
Members during 2002
The Honourable Justice Greg James (Chairperson - from October)
Mrs N Johnston (Chairperson - until October)
Mr S Jupp
Mr P Schell (until May)
Mr B Howe (from May)
Mr R Escott
Mr D Barrow (Legal Aid Commission of NSW - Ms C Farnan as alternate)
Ms K Byrne (Sheriff’s Office)
Ms F Cameron (Legislation and Policy Division, Attorney General’s Department)
Mr C Craigie (Public Defenders Office - Mr P Zahra SC as alternate)
Ms G Drennan (Office of Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions)
Mr J Feneley (District Court of NSW - until August)
Mr L Grant (Department of Corrective Services)
Ms C Griffiths (Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions – Ms S Govind as alternate)
Major H Harmer (Salvation Army)
Ms C McComish (Probation & Parole Service, Department of Corrective Services – Ms K Blinkhorn as alternate)
Ms J Mathison (Court Reporting Services, Attorney General’s Department)
Mr R Motto (Court Reporting Services, Attorney General’s Department)
Ms T Painting (NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics & Research, Attorney General’s Department)
Mr J Riznyczok (District Court of NSW)
Mr P Ryan (District Court of NSW - since August)
Ms C Vernon (Victims Services, Attorney General’s Department – Ms P Wilde as alternate)
Secretary: Ms A Younes.
MEDIA GROUP
Purpose
An inaugural meeting of representatives from the courts, legal profession and media was held during the year. The Group will reconvene on an “as needs” basis to discuss issues concerning media reporting of, in particular, pending and current criminal trials.
Work in 2002
The Group met on 25 October. Matters discussed at the meeting included:
• applications to discharge juries, adjourn or stay trials on the basis of media reports of a prejudicial nature
• media access to exhibits
• suppression of names and/or aspects of evidence
• guidelines and processes to assist media in identifying trials which may be affected by media reporting
• review of the notification system of suppression orders and non-publication orders.
Participants during 2002
The Honourable Justice Wood AO (Chairperson)
The Honourable Mr Justice Young
The Honourable Justice Graham Barr
The Honourable Justice Greg James
The Honourable Justice Michael Adams
The Honourable Chief Judge, District Court of NSW
Ms S Bursill (representing the Chief Magistrate)
Ms K Ashbee
Ms J Stanton
Mr N Cowdery QC (Director of Public Prosecutions)
Mr S Odgers SC (representing the President, NSW Bar Association)
Mr P Zahra SC (Senior Public Defender)
Ms D Auchinachie (ABC Legal Department)
Mr M Boyd (SBS)
Mr M Cameron (representing Brian Gallagher, News Limited)
Mr R Coleman (John Fairfax Limited)
Ms E Cowdery (AAP)
Mr C Craigie (Public Defenders Office)
Mr D Giddy (representing the President, Law Society of NSW)
Mr W Grant (Legal Aid Commission of NSW)
Ms A Laing (ACP Publishing)
Mr M Lloyd-Jones (Channel 7)
Ms S McCausland (SBS)
Mr P Reddy (representing Andrew Stewart, Channel 9)
Superintendent R Redfern (NSW Police)
Mr R Todd (representing Steven Partington, Channel 10).
|
|
