At a function hosted by the Bar Council on 17 August 2010, speeches were delivered by the Honourable Justice Peter Murphy of the Family Court of Australia Richard Douglas SC, President of the Bar Association of Queensland and Federal Magistrate Michael Baumann.
The function was attended by members of the judiciary from the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Magistrates Court.
The speeches of Justice Murphy and the President are reproduced below.
RICHARD DOUGLAS SC:
Your Honours, Queensland Law Society Vice-President Bruce Doyle, and colleagues.
Thank you for attending.
In particular I welcome Justice Burr and Justice Young visiting from southern climbs. With weather like this no doubt your Honours will find good reason to extend your stay.
Many of you think, no doubt, that the only purpose of this occasion is to recognise the industry and skills of the judges who sit and the advocates who regularly appear in the Family Court and the Federal Magistrates Court.
That is true, but not comprehensive of purpose.
This occasion is also to recognise that skilled professional advocacy plays an important role in our society, and that the Family Court and Federal Magistrates Court, presided over by lawyers of the highest quality, is a place where that advocacy can be practised on a regular basis.
All too frequently in recent years young fresh faced barristers, when I ask what legal sphere they hope to practise in, retort “any except family law and crime”. Another common answer is “commercial law”.
The first “negative” answer is not only irritating but insulting, per se and to many here.
The second answer, for many, remains aspirational, not recognising that commercial law permeates most practice areas.
To be fair, it is equally irritating and insulting to those who infrequently appear in specialist courts, such as the Family Court or the Federal Magistrates Court, to receive a comment (usually from the opposing advocate, but occasionally from the Bench) such as “I didn’t know you appeared in this court” or “We don’t do things that way in this court”.
Surely it is bleeding obvious that it is the quality of the advocacy that counts not whether the practitioner is perceived as a member of the so-called “club”.
Speaking of the quality of advocates, Lord Birkett, in his 1960 BBC book “Six Advocates” said this of the desired traits of a barrister:
Whatever the case and whatever the court, the first and vital thing is that the advocate shall know the case he desires to make with complete thoroughness. He must have a complete mastery of the facts and he must have the power to present them in the most attractive way. He must have a quick mind and an understanding heart. He must acquire in some way an insight into human nature and a natural unforced sympathy with all sorts and conditions of men. Above all, he must have what I can only call an intuitive recognition of what the circumstances of the case require as it slowly unfolds itself before the court.
These qualities are required, and can be practiced in any court or tribunal.
With those matters in mind I invite to the lectern the first of our two speakers this evening.
Justice Peter Murphy, as formerly Murphy S.C., was one of the Queensland bar’s most accomplished trial and appellate silks.
He is a nationally accredited advocacy trainer.
He is passionate about good advocacy, not just for its own sake but for the benefits it affords the community.
When I was an undergraduate student at university in the mid-1970s he and another fellow named Tim Gartside were the source of much humour.
As a young lawyer he cycled everywhere.
I recall he and Tim cycled in the UK from John o’Groats in the north to Lands End in the south and then beyond into and across the Sahara (albeit, you will be pleased to know, then with ferry assistance from the UK).
I welcome Justice Murphy.
JUSTICE PETER MURPHY:
Thank you Richard.
Of course, I want to thank you, your Council and the Association for this evening – and, in particular, its appealing price tag.
But I also want to thank you, and through you, the Council and Association more generally, for your genuinely active steps in keeping open the lines of communication between the Association and the court and for your support of us.
This evening had its genesis in some recent informal but wide-ranging discussions between us and, as you have correctly identified, the preservation of advocacy as a skill worthy of commitment and hard work and its crucial role in the preservation of the Bar was central to those discussions.
Our conversations in that respect are on-going and I think it is fair to say that we are genuinely excited about the prospect of some future legal education initiatives in advocacy training that are, as yet, at an embryonic stage.
We also spoke, though, about the attitude to which you have made reference – the “anything but family law and crime attitude”. One of the things that this evening is designed to underscore is the irony of that attitude.
The fact is that, if you are a barrister who is at all interested in the art of advocacy – and, as importantly, interested in preserving its central role to the practice of this profession – family law and crime should be high on the list of practice areas. They are the areas that get you on feet. They are the areas that expose you to a variety of witnesses – expert and lay – and to the widest variety of circumstances within which the craft is practised.
And, of course, as experience and skill grows, commercial law may not just be aspirational: family law practice frequently intersects with commercial law.
So, too, we spoke of “the club” of which you made mention. When at the bar I considered that the walls of “the club” were more illusory than real and I hold to that view now.
I think I can say, Richard, that, in my court at least, greeting the newcomer with “I didn’t know you appeared in my court” will, if said at all, be words of welcome.
And, in my court at least, the words “We don’t do things that way in this court” are by no means reserved for those new to the jurisdiction; they are applied universally to all who are unprepared.
For the court’s part, thank you again for tonight. Thank you again for your support and for facilitating this advertisement for advocacy and, particularly, this advertisement for family law as an area where good advocacy can be practised and developed.
I propose that, in the spirit of co-operation, we should now partake of the Bar Association’s largesse.
RICHARD DOUGLAS SC:
Mr Michael Baumann was Queensland’s first Federal Magistrate. He was appointed Federal Magistrate in 2000 when he also graduated with a master of laws.
In his time as a solicitor he was one of Queensland’s leading solicitors. As a young solicitor he was named as the Law Council Young Lawyer of the Year and two years later elected the youngest ever President of the Queensland Law Society.
He also served as President of the Legal Aid Commission and Chair of the Board of Legal Aid Queensland.
I welcome Federal Magistrate Michael Baumann.
