This may be the author’s version of a work that was submitted/accepted for publication in the following source:

Kiel-Chisholm, Scott (2014) In conversation with The Honourable Ian Callinan AC. Intellectual Property Forum, 2014(97), pp. 7-15.

This file was downloaded from: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/73135/

c Copyright 2014 Scott Kiel-Chisholm

Contributors grant to the Intellectual Property Society of and New Zealand Inc a non-exclusive, irrevocable, perpetual licence to publish their articles on-line in the form as published in the Journal, for services,including but not limited to libraries and educational institutions, as approved by the Society from time to time.

License: Creative Commons: Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 Aus- tralia

Notice: Please note that this document may not be the Version of Record (i.e. published version) of the work. Author manuscript versions (as Sub- mitted for peer review or as Accepted for publication after peer review) can be identified by an absence of publisher branding and/or typeset appear- ance. If there is any doubt, please refer to the published source. http:// www.ipsanz.com.au/ ip-forum/ a-selection-of-extracts/ In Conversation with The Honourable Ian Callinan AC

Scott Kiel-Chisholm hen, in 1977, the Australian electorate provided a double Lecturer majority to effect a change of section 72 of the Commonwealth School of Law Constitution requiring judges of the toW retire at the age of 70 years old, I doubt we understood the continuing University of capacity of these esteemed members of the judiciary. For the opportunity Technology to sit and talk with Ian Callinan AC who, in compliance with that amendment, retired from the High Court in September 2007, I needed to wait until he returned from The Hague where he was sitting as a Judge ad hoc on the International Court of Justice.

I wanted to know how he felt about his time on the High Court, what his thoughts are on the operation of the High Court, the IP cases he decided, the real life issues that he feels impact on counsel who are appearing before the High Court and the people he regarded as role models. During our conversation, Mr Callinan laughed often and when he did his eyes lit up, revealing his passion for life. He is an incredibly genuine Australian who loved his time as a barrister, enjoyed his role on the High Court, enjoys his current job as mediator, loves writing novels, has a great desire for continual improvement in the quality of legal education and legal advocacy and sees a need for change in IP law. When I asked: “So, what might the future hold for you?”, he laughed and said: “Well, at my age I don’t have a long horizon time”. I said: “Just enjoy Although a native of Casino, New South Wales, the journey?”, to which Mr Callinan responded: Mr Callinan is regarded as a Queenslander. Indeed, “Exactly”. he grew up in , finished high school at Q: You retired from the High Court of Brisbane Grammar and graduated in law at The Australia in August 2007, but you have . Appointed in 1978 as a certainly not retired from the legal Queen’s Counsel, Mr Callinan enjoyed this period profession. Did you find the transition from of his legal career and we discussed an aspect of the judge back to barrister difficult? Christopher Skase case, which reinforced my belief that Mr Callinan is an incredibly skilful advocate. A: I have not returned to the Bar. What I have done are mediations and arbitrations and On 14 September 1998, ABC Four Corners some reviews of government departments broadcasted the views of some prominent or other departments. I found the transition Australians on the appointment of Mr Callinan to easy; I personally didn’t have any difficulties. the High Court. In assessing the type of person Mr I know some people who have been judges Callinan is, Tony Morris QC said: “Ian Callinan have found the transition hard and I’ve isn’t a coward”, while former Commonwealth said to them, only half-jokingly, that what Attorney-General, Michael Lavarch, said: “He was they’re missing is the deference. (laughs) regarded as an absolutely outstanding criminal Q: What I have heard is that you have been lawyer within the Queensland legal profession, I extremely busy! mean really a top-notch advocate”. A: I have been quite busy. Look, I don’t want I was not interested in raising any of the in any way to say that I wasn’t very, very controversial issues that Mr Callinan has grateful for being a judge for 10 wonderful 7 encountered as an advocate in high profile matters. years. They were intellectually stimulating In Conversation with The Honourable Ian Callinan AC

years, but my time at the Bar before that risk is the introduction of more subjectivity would be my preferred time really. once you don’t have a very structured Q: So you find that the skills that you approach. They do not fully understand our developed at the Bar are very valuable in the hierarchal court system, a final appellate role you are playing now? court laying down the law, it is a much more fluid thing. No doubt there are some A: Yes, and my judicial time was important advantages with their system but I do not too because being a judge teaches you to be have expertise in the civil system. patient and to listen, and those are two very important qualities you need to have if you Before I sat on the International Court of are going to do mediation. Justice I did have one direct encounter with civil law. I went to Spain for an extradition Q: On 24 January 2014, you were appointed hearing and a court of three judges decided as a Judge ad hoc of the International Court that matter. They were Spanish judges of Justice for the proceeding Timore-Leste from Majorca. That was an interesting v Australia. How does that incredible experience. The proceedings on behalf of the opportunity differ from your experience on Australian government, that was seeking the the High Court? extradition, were conducted by the Chief A: That is an entirely different experience from Crown prosecutor of Spain who was a very, the practice of the common law method. very able, and very nice man. I went over to Common law jurisdictions approach matters assist him and the Australian government. different from the way in which public In the first conference he said: “Have you international lawyers approach matters. brought your robes?”. I said: “Of course Public international law has been heavily not, why would I bring them?”. He said: influenced by civil law, European law, and “Because you are going to appear with me requires an adaptation for a person trained and assist me”. I said: “How can I possibly in the common law method to deal with do that. I don’t know civil law or Spanish civil law concepts and public international law”. He said: “I will introduce you to the law concepts which are heavily influenced Court and you will assist me”. I sent for my by the former. robes and I sat with him. The proceedings Q: What were the main changes that you were translated, of course, although a needed to make? number of the witnesses spoke English A: I am not suggesting that the common law well. That was an interesting experience and technique is a flawless system, but it does introduction to the civil law. have a great deal of method in it, in the Q: Was that the Christopher Skase matter? sense that there is a very clear initial fact- A: Yes. Actually, that Court made an order finding process. It is an adversarial process, for his extradition and he then appealed so the fact-finding process is divided very but neither I, nor the Director of Public strictly from the finding of and application Prosecutions who was instructing me, of the law. Neither public international law participated in the appeal. I don’t quite nor civil law as practised is structured in understand why but it was handled by the those ways. Office of the Attorney-General. I don’t Q: Does the doctrine of precedent from the know why we were not involved in the common law system play any role in that appeal when it went to the final Spanish process? Court because we were so heavily involved A: Well, public international lawyers, civil in the first hearing. Fresh evidence was put lawyers, do not proceed that way. If in by Mr Skase very late. In any event, the precedent suits them, they will apply that decision of the lower Court of three Judges precedent, but, as you know, they are was overturned. not bound to precedent. When you take Q: Your incredible contribution to both the law precedent out of the system there is less and the arts has been recognised by your structure. They would say, and in some appointment as a Companion of the Order 8 respects they are probably right, that they of Australia in 2003 and being awarded are better able to do justice, but the great a Doctorate of Laws in 2010 by The University of Queensland. I note that you would hope that writing other things would no longer use the QC after your name, just serve that purpose. the AC. Q: In a novel you are building the story, stating A: There’s been a debate about this, whether, facts and developing the plot. once you are appointed to a superior court, A: Two English judges I can think of, lots your commission as Queen’s Counsel of judges wrote very well of course, but merges in that higher appointment. I’m Lord Denning and Justice Megarry were of the view it does. I think all of the other wonderful writers. Lord Denning, in Miller High Court judges I know take the same v Jackson [1977] QB 966, wrote the famous view. judgment regarding cricket balls being hit You might notice that County Court judges over a fence and striking a neighbouring and District Court judges keep their QC house. Justice Megarry wrote a great titles once they are judges and I think the judgment about Errol Flynn. It is called theory of that is that theirs is a kind of Re Flynn (No 1), where he summarises a statutory appointment which is not quite great deal about Errol Flynn’s life and he the same as an appointment to the superior goes to an autobiography by Errol Flynn court. Most people who have been on and discusses that. It is a brilliantly written a superior court take the view that your judgment and I recommend that people commission as QC is subsumed in some read it. way in your position on the superior court. He sets out a number of things but said the Q: How has your commitment to the law and only question I have to decide is in what your artistic literary pursuits complemented jurisdiction Errol Flynn was domiciled at each other? the time of his death. He talked about Errol A: The important thing is not to get them Flynn’s life. confused (laughs). Q: Even Australian Crawl wrote a song about Q: Yes, of course, because you’re not writing Errol Flynn. fiction when you’re sitting on the bench? A: I didn’t know about that but have a look A: Precisely! Look, there’s been some writing at Justice Megarry’s judgment because it on this by an American intellectual, Martha is one of the most entertaining and best Nussbaum, who takes the view that all written judgments I have read. Not that judges should read fiction extensively. This I am suggesting it is the job of judges to was stated in her 1995 book, Poetic Justice: entertain; rather to the contrary. Nothing The Literary Imagination and Public Life, can be more inappropriate than a judge where she said it helps them to empathise making jokes in a serious matter. It is serious and I’ve always been interested in what she for the parties but there have been some says. I don’t know if she has anything to cases where something is said in an amusing say about judges who write fiction but she way that is not inappropriate but it is a certainly says judges should read it. (laughs) matter of some concern. I remember when She has written some very interesting things I was young barrister, my master, Desmond that are not fiction, and has some good Sturgess QC who was a wonderful jury theories of law, ethics and philosophy. advocate, said to me: “If you’re appearing in a criminal court for a defendant you never Q: Do you find your skills in the literary field make jokes and you never laugh”. He added: were of assistance in the writing of your “The rest of the court can be laughing but it judgments? is a serious matter and you never do that”. I A: Well, that is really for others to judge, think he was right. Jokes in civil cases might but it seems quite natural, that one will be all right without a jury and sometimes complement the other but there is no reason with a jury in a defamation case. why, when you’re stating the facts in a case, Q: Your advice then to new counsel would be you shouldn’t state them in an interesting that it is ill-advised to crack a joke before in way. One of the great goals of judicial the bench? writing is clarity, making the point, and one 9 In Conversation with The Honourable Ian Callinan AC

A: Exactly! The best piece of advice they can be Michael McHugh AC, as I did last month given is that if a judge cracks a joke don’t try in Perth. to cap it. (laughs) Q: And moving around all over the place Q: Will you continue writing novels in your throughout Australia and overseas. spare time? A: Yes, but I would not like to overemphasise A: I just received the proofs for my next novel the companionship on the Court itself which is to be published in a month or so. because people work very hard, and there I had one published last year. I had one is not a big social life connected with the published the year before that. Court. All of us would go back to our own Q: And the one that is about to be released? cities to write our judgments. When I was on the Court nobody had a permanent A: It’s called The Only Case. It is my first novel residence in Canberra. I think it is a good that has an exclusively legal theme. It’s about thing to come back home. a trial. My publisher has always wanted me to write that sort of book about a trial but Q: Yes, you kept your connection with your I’ve always resisted it. Any legal themes in home? any of the other novels have been incidental A: Exactly! We all had chambers in our home but in this one the whole focus is on a trial. city and access to libraries. But the Court Q: I guess your resistance has been again, the hasn’t always been collegiate. For example, danger of mixing a novel with judicial Justice Starke was absolutely vitriolic with reasoning? his colleagues. The first High Court (there were only three of them), used to have lunch A: Yes, I thought it was really too predictable together every day. You can understand that and rather banal for me to be writing on because they had all been in the Federation legal themes. That doesn’t mean that legal movement together, all participated in themes don’t come up but certainly they writing the Constitution to some extent. have not been the major theme. I am a tremendous admirer of the effort Q: On 24 June 2007, the eve of your that went into Federation. They knew what retirement from the High Court of one another thought, there weren’t a lot Australia, Monica Attard interviewed of dissents. There were some but very few. you on ABC Sunday Profile. During that The big change came when Justice Isaac interview you said that the High Court is “a Isaacs came on the Court because the tone congenial Court, people all get on with one of some of his judgments was quite strident another. The Court works and it wouldn’t and rather florid and that was not the style work unless there was congeniality on it”. of the earlier Court. Actually, he had his Do you maintain contact with those other way with the Engineers’ Case with respect to judges? And, if so, how? which I have a very strong view which I’ve A: Yes, with some of them I do, but sometimes expressed in the WorkChoices case. contact is quite fleeting. Last week, for Q: Where there was disagreement, was that example, I was in Sydney for a farewell of a dealt with in a collegiate way as well? friend of mine from the Federal Court who A: Well, we’d agree to disagree. The High I led at the Bar and I went to his farewell Court has really been interesting because ceremony and was sitting next to William right from the beginning the judges took Gummow AC. I have maintained more the view that they were entitled to write, regular contact with AC, and they would write their own individual an old friend of mine, and Dyson Hayden judgments if they thought it appropriate, AC. Occasionally I correspond with Michael but that there would be an attempt to find a Kirby AC, CMG and he corresponds with consensus. I must say that when I first went me. I suppose the two friends from the to the Court I was anxious to be part of the Court would be Murray Gleeson AC and consensual judgments, joint judgments, but Dyson Haydon AC and we remain friends I found it more difficult than I imagined, although we live in different cities. I also and in the end I wrote my own judgments stay in contact and sometimes dine with 10 most of the time. In fact, I did a rough draft of a judgment in at least 80 or 90% of the draft it in the way enacted. What has been cases on which I sat. That does not mean your experience of the way in which counsel that I didn’t participate in joint judgments. has dealt with statutory interpretation? I often discarded it, but always felt I had A: Look, I have to tell you that I think is a to do some writing myself to help reach a great misfortune the universities are not conclusion. teaching and reinforcing the principles Q: Of the 11 High Court intellectual property of statutory interpretation because so related decisions you participated in much more now is statute law and a lot between 2000 and 2007, you were included of it is ill-drafted. Practically none of it in joint reasons in six (Nike, Grain Pool is unambiguous and that means that the of WA, Kimberly-Clark, Firebelt, Polyair rules of statutory interpretation have to be and Lockwood), concurring but separate invoked. Frankly, there is not much known judgments in two (Alphapharm and about it and it is not as well done as it Parramatta Design), the sole dissenter in one should be. (ABC v Lenah), and concurring dissent but I don’t want to sound like an old fulminator, separate judgments in two (Maggbury and but we would have counsel get up and Network Ten). start talking about a case on common law What was the reason for giving the principles. As Chief Justice concurring but separate judgments each said, common law principles heavily inform time? the Constitution and statute law but in A: Maggbury I thought was outrageous. The the end it is the words that count. Counsel trial Judge was completely right, so I would get up and start talking about thought. The man who had invented the common law principles. One or more of the ironing board, nobody suggested that it did members of the Court would ask: “Don’t not have some inventiveness about it. He we have to decide this on the legislation?”. made his application for a patent and then it We might get a guarded, “Yes” or “What became public, but the application was still sections do we go to first?” (laughs) We pending. would have all sorts of hesitation about that sometimes. It didn’t mean they didn’t know As for the Network Ten Case, the program or go to the sections, but they started in the was put together from other people’s work. wrong place. Unless you start in the right The fact that they were not long segments place, you are not going to end up in the did not matter. The program in question right place. would never have existed but for the work of others which I said in dissent, so I was Another problem, I think, is in relation obviously wrong. (smiles) to not only statutory interpretation but also the use of authority. Electronic word Q: That’s interesting because it seems to depend searches don’t give the context of the words on what the emphasis should be when the which is essential. If you are construing Court applies the law to the facts – whether the statute you should, first of all, read the the judges feel it is more important that the statute really quickly, the whole statute, commercial interests of one party prevail and then you go to the sections, but you over another when enforcing an agreement go to the sections in question with at least or whether there are overriding public policy an idea of the thrust of the legislation and issues. how those sections have to fit in with other A: But there shouldn’t be, the language is sections. I think universities should have a quite clear! There is a lot of gloss on these full subject on statutory interpretation and statutory cases. it should be a compulsory subject. Q: IP rights are all created by legislation. In Q: That’s interesting because when Michael your dissenting judgment in Network Ten Kirby was on the High Court, he gave a v TCN Channel Nine, you made it clear presentation at the Queensland University that it is for the Court to give effect to the of Technology after hearing applications for language of the Act and not to speculate Special Leave to Appeal here in Brisbane, all 11 about the reasons the legislature decided to of which involved statutory interpretation. In Conversation with The Honourable Ian Callinan AC

He said it infuriated him that counsel Court bar as such in Canberra. Very few of were asking the Court to interpret a word the litigants come from Canberra. I would totally out of context from its place in the have been content to have the High Court sentence, the section and the Act in which it in Sydney or Melbourne, it wouldn’t matter appeared. much, it would have been more convenient A: His criticism would be shared by every for everybody. In recent years it has tended member of the Court. to travel a little bit less. Q: As you say, it starts at university where we Q: Certainly, but with the digital age the High build those skills and these are carried into Court late last year began vodcasting its the profession. hearings online, so to some degree that contact with the High Court is, in a way, A: All of the law of the Commonwealth is greater than it was? statutory, literally. The Commonwealth has been increasingly imperialistic, treading A: It is not quite the same as being there in into all sorts of areas that are more naturally person. Students and the local profession State areas which means more and more of can come and that was the idea of the the law is found in legislation. The States circuit courts, that justice went to the have not been averse to legislating either. people. It is a good concept. I had to do an expert determination and one Q: What recommendations would you make of the things it turned on was the legislation for counsel who are to appear before the in relation to carbon and green credits and High Court for the first time or those who collectively, the legislation in one State and have appeared on many occasions? the Commonwealth, including regulation A: Well, the High Court is not an easy Court amounted to more than 1300 pages! Now to appear before. In the nature of things, frankly, that’s absurd! The Income Tax seven experienced lawyers are likely to Assessment Act is thousands of pages. have, collectively, more knowledge than the Q: I guess some people would argue that it’s lawyers appearing before them so is very great for lawyers because the general public hard for counsel to appear. In order to get can’t possibly know their obligations under through the work, propositions have to all the statute law? be tested and tested fairly quickly, and the Court does tend to interrogate counsel so A: It is very hard for people. It means that you have to be prepared. Not only do you lawyers need to specialise and it is very need to know your own argument very well, hard even for the specialist to get on top of you also have to know your opponent’s all this. We will probably end up like the argument. You have to be able to deal with medical specialists and get narrower and that. narrower. Lawyers who only do elbows. (laughs) Some people find it difficult to handle the interrogative style but it’s essential. There’s Q: We’ll see what happens. Would you like to nothing like an oral hearing. The United have seen any changes in the way the High States, as you know, not just the Supreme Court operates? Court, but all the intermediate courts and A: No, I think the High Court is reasonably all the State courts and appeal courts, they efficient with the number of judgments and don’t give long at all, maybe because of the the number of Special Leave applications. It sheer volume of work. But that interrogative gets through a great deal of work. Another process I found very helpful as a judge. I was thing I would like to say about the High often much assisted, sometimes even more Court work is that I think it would be assisted, by the questions that were asked by a great pity if the Court ceases to go on my colleagues on the Court than anything circuit. They don’t take very long and it’s a counsel said. relatively small price to pay. It might cost There is no doubt about it, that questioning, money for the Court to sit in Brisbane, probing and testing of propositions can Adelaide, Perth and Hobart and I think it be done better orally and collectively with should occasionally sit in Darwin. Canberra 12 everybody present. It can be done much is an artificial construct. There isn’t a High more efficiently than just having hearings fraternity of IP lawyers across the board on the papers, or even substantially on which, in turn, assisted you in your role as the papers. It can be like a slaughterhouse an adjudicator of IP disputes? on occasions, (laughs) if you are there A: There were certainly a group of specialists on a Special Leave application. When who speak a common sort of language I was on the Court it would be doing but no, I don’t think it was of particular about 700 Special Leave applications a assistance. I think sometimes it gets in the year and we were sitting with two judges way of the original language. It doesn’t on the applications and three on cases mean that it isn’t helpful to have specialists where we were concerned there might be because they know all the cases, they know disagreement. That meant that in addition the language of the statute but sometimes, to cases we sat on, each judge would do you find this not just in IP but other in the order of about 200 Special Leave specialist areas, you’ve got to watch out for applications a year. You have to be quick LORE becoming LAW. (laughs) and efficient to get through them. I think Q: What was particularly interesting in your it is even more testing being an applicant dissent in ABC v Lenah was your call for on a Special Leave applications case than consideration of the tort of invasion of conducting an appeal itself. privacy. You suggested that the time was Q: I believe it’s 20 minutes for submissions on ripe for either the Court or the legislature leave applications? to recognise this right of privacy which A: Yes, 20 minutes each side, but in United should be protected. Do you feel your call States the actual argument itself, not the has influenced change and to what degree application for leave, you are allowed 20 could such protection be introduced in IP minutes advocacy. Some years ago the law? For example, could it be argued that United States Supreme Court received 7000 protection of a person’s image could go well applications for cert (certiorari), as they beyond trade mark protection and could call Applications for Leave to Appeal, more constitute a new IP right? now, thousands of Applications for Leave to A: Well, I discussed that in Lenah. I discussed Appeal. The judges just can’t deal with the people having celebrity status, their number of applications so they are largely endorsement of products, their image itself dealt with by clerks in a clerks’ pool. It as being of considerable commercial value. I makes me a bit uncomfortable to think that suggested that that was an aspect that ought when you appeal to a court applications are to be explored, perhaps invasion of privacy dealt with by those employees other than could cover that. I also discussed in Lenah the judges. I hope we never reach that stage. the protection of a spectacle and I was Q: Counsel appearing before the High Court thinking of that old racecourse case, Victoria for the very first time will be nervous as Park Racing & Recreation Grounds Co Ltd anything for a start. v Taylor. If you are putting on a spectacle, A: I don’t think I ever saw the Court to be spectacles are very, very expensive to mount. unkind to junior counsel. I can remember It is not just the moving image that can when I was junior counsel appearing before be produced later or the commentary that the Court when Sir was can be reproduced but the actual spectacle presiding. He was quite helpful to me, but itself has an immediacy which people will I lost. Later on, when I appeared in that pay a lot of money to see. There is a big Court as a silk, the Court treated me more investment that goes into the running of it, firmly than it did when as a junior. I did so yes, I think it should be protected. The actually appear before Sir Garfield Barwick precise way in which you might do it needs as a silk. Yes, it was much tougher as a silk. consideration. I do not think the Court is insensitive, nor What I said in Lenah, and indeed what should it be, of the fear of counsel appearing the Chief Justice also said, have been before it for the first time. referred to by a number of Law Reform Q: From your observations from the bench, Commissions. There have been two 13 did you feel that there exists a kind of decisions in which invasion of privacy In Conversation with The Honourable Ian Callinan AC

has been decided as being available and law. What should lawyers concentrate on damages have been awarded for it. One when dealing with this issue? of the decisions is that of District Court A: Perhaps the Law Reform Commission Senior Judge Skoien in Grosse v Purvis and should have another look at it and a Victorian County Court. The other was should recommend amendments. It’s not the decision of Judge Hampel in Jane Doe v something that can be talked about off the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. There cuff as it obviously requires very careful have been these two cases where there has work and there is a public interest element been an application of this and there have in access. All of those interests need to been more references to the Chief Justice’s be balanced. I think that all of the IP decision than mine. One of the things that law, certainly the written IP law, has not was decisive in Lenah was that the plaintiff kept pace with electronic dissemination was an incorporated company. I thought of information. One of the arguments in the ABC’s conduct there was questionable Gutnick, and I found it unattractive, is that because the material that was being telecast it’s very hard to police. A lot of the laws was almost certainly the product of a crime, are very hard to police. The notion that the breaking and entering, and nobody could police themselves or any other regulator have believed otherwise. can discover and successfully prosecute, or Q: Are there any other key IP issues you would prevent all breaches of the law all the time, like to see addressed, either by the courts or is an absurdity. The worst cases, one tries to by the legislature? find the worst cases or example cases, this is A: No, I wouldn’t say anything I haven’t said where deterrence comes in. in my judgments, such as in Channel Ten. This idea that you should change the law In one of those cases I quoted an English if you cannot enforce the law because the IP judge, Justice Peterson, who didn’t electronic age makes it difficult to do so, spent a long time on the bench but said does not impress me at all. That is one of in University of London Press v University the reasons why you want a remedy. I think Tutorial Press, “what is worth copying, is it’s a pity that exemplary damages was taken prima facie worth protecting”. I think that is out of the law of defamation. There is such a reasonable start. a heavy imbalance in means and capacity, Q: As a practitioner, with all the changes and between the natural person who has been reforms to IP law, where do you think the defamed and the publisher. There is a form greatest future challenges lie? of exemplary damages in IP law, for flagrant infringement, where you need to pay more. A: Protecting material against the internet. We I think that’s a good idea. I think time is have a foretaste of that in the Gutnick case overdue for another look at all of this. where it was argued by the publisher that publication should be regarded as having Q: Just a glimpse back in time. You were occurred in the place where the server President of the Queensland Bar Association is, which was in New Jersey, USA, not from 1984-1987 and President of the Australia. That is going to be the problem. Australian Bar Association from 1984- In the recent iiNet case, where the film was 1985. What were the main issues for the downloaded, the High Court did not find bar during those years? Have these issues for the Hollywood studios. If intellectual changed, and if so, how? property, originality and creativity are A: Look, they were more prosperous years, to be encouraged and protected it is no I think it’s harder for barristers now. The good dismissing protection as a statutory 1980s were a time of entrepreneurial monopoly. You really have to encourage extravagance and that led to a lot of creativity. Not to do so is to debase litigation keeping lawyers employed. In intellectual work. particular, people have forgotten that a lot Q: That’s interesting because a number of the of new banks came to Australia because cases that the High Court has dealt with banking licences were freed up and there 14 involved the issue of inventiveness in patent was a deal of lending. I think that some of the banks which came to this country made some loans rather imprudently. That created A: I don’t think I have one but what I’d say to a lot of litigation. So, it was an easier time barristers, young barristers, is, be prepared. for barristers. I don’t know whether the (smiles) issues have changed very much. There are Q: Is there anything else you’d like to discuss? always some issues on which bars disagree A: Yes, there is one thing that I would like with governments, but I can’t remember any to reinforce. I think barristers need to particular issue that is different from the read very, very widely. The original idea issues of that time. I just think it is harder of barristers in earlier days was that they for young barristers to get a start. need not have a university law degree, just Q: It helps build their resilience? a broad-based humanities type education. A: Yes, well look, people forget that it is one Even in straight law, which I did at The of the few professions in which you do University of Queensland, you had to do most of your work in public, the most a year of English, you had to do a year of important work in public, and it is intensely political science, a language and one other competitive. Doctors in an operating arts subject. Most of us did philosophy. theatre aren’t competing against each I think that the current law degree is other. We have an adversarial system and deficient. They should require at least those barristers (and judges) perform this work in three other fundamental subjects to be public. The Bar is very good at circulating studied. information. If you make a mistake in Q: As well as statutory interpretation? court at 10:30am, it will be round the Bar A: Exactly, yes! (smiles) common room by 1:30pm. Q: You can run but you can’t hide. A: Exactly! Actors, sports people and barristers are working in public even more so than politicians. Q: On a personal level, have you had role models or people who have inspired you and why?

A: Well, I had some very good senior people at the bar. My pupil master was Desmond Sturgess QC, an outstanding advocate, and I was in chambers with Cedric Hanson QC who was an extremely good barrister in every area. Desmond Sturgess QC was an outstanding jury advocate. Both were most generous with their time, and I would not have got where I did get, or have had the luck that I did have, if it hadn’t been for those two. Sir was also an outstanding Chief Justice of the High Court. Q: It speaks volumes for that collegiate spirit within the bar, even though you said it was extremely competitive, there are opportunities for more senior counsel to guide younger counsel? A: Yes, absolutely. Q: Do you have a motto or guiding principle or if not, what might it be? 15