Drastic changes to Australia's legal training and admission rules a revelation to lawyers and potential clients in ASEAN who have been led to believe that Australian judges and lawyers offer a premium service ,and are worth their higher fees,5 star hotel stay, first class travel......

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                            

Australia hopes to exercie soft power via LAWASIA, but has never admitted to problems of corruption within the legal system in Australia itself

In October 2025 the Chief Justice Of NSW, Andrew Bell demolished Australia's decades old Practial Legal Training, a prerequisite for admission to practise ,declaring it not fit for purpose, and not worth the money. Bell's decision in the matter is long overdue, but it was the NSW Legal Profession Admission Board which he now heads, that defended and permitted the scandal of the PLT.

The NSW LAPB did so despite decades old complaints about the PLT, that are  a matter of public record. Those complaints and more were given recent publicity after Bell commenced his campaign against the PLT and its main provider, the College Of Law, in February 2025. 

The former CEO of The College Of Law, Neville Carter, has claimed that he has trained over 100,000 lawyers, some of whom are likely to have become judges, and thus the problem of the not fit for purpose PLT is widespread and goes to the core of Australian legal professional standards and skills.

However, despite the severity of the problem little has been done  to inform the public here and the rest of this region where Australian lawyers and judges habitually seek work, touting themselves as having the training and knowledge to provide a premium service. The Law Council Australia and LAWASIA, who are normally ever ready to admonish ASEAN lawyers and judges who they feel are not up to mark, have been especially silent. Of course, if they were to do so it would be difficult for Australian lawyers and judges seeking work in ASEAN  to justify their demands for higher fees, first class travel and 5 star hotel stay. The English language skills argument has failed,given the number of UK lawyers who have established themselves in Singapore.

See Also

Thursday, July 23, 2020

Concerns over HK as a forum for arbitration, but arbitration lawyers would rather go to Paris, London ,Singapore and avoid Australia: Australian lawyers losing valuable work, but will still not admit that they have a Malaysian type Eusoffe Chin problem

by Ganesh Sahathevan






Japan Times has reported (quoting Bloomberg): 

International companies are increasingly avoiding Hong Kong as a jurisdiction for settling disputes through arbitration, one of the clearest signs yet that China’s tightening grip on the financial hub has eroded trust in its legal system.

Businesses are instead choosing rival hubs like Singapore, Paris and London, according to interviews with arbitration lawyers, a shift that has accelerated since the Chinese government bypassed Hong Kong’s legislature to impose a sweeping national security law.

While it is true that Hong and Singapore have been the preferred forums for arbitration due to proximity to the parties, the fact that parties and arbitration lawyers would prefer far away Paris and London to Australia given the current concerns about Hong Kong raises the question: why are arbitration lawyers and parties avoiding Australia, despite this being a well established, English speaking common law jurisdiction?

The matter of Australian judges ignoring precedent and instead using their courts and public standing to promote personal agendas, no matter how noble, is quite likely a factor.

TO BE READ WITH 

Sunday, February 16, 2020

Australia's legal profession faces its Eusoffe Chin moment, but will Australians show the same courage as Malaysians did in seeking judicial reform? For details of the problem in Australia see documents on NSW Dept Of Justice website

by Ganesh Sahathevan

Eusoff Chin,2nd from left ,standing next

to disgraced Malaysian lawyer VK Lingam

In 2018 Australian defamation judge Judith Gibson told ABC Radio:

Judge Gibson described defamation proceedings as a "trial by ambush" that may actually prevent the truth from coming out.

"That's not a system of law that is going to attract admiration and respect from other countries or large companies wanting to do business in Australia."
Judge Gibson is calling on her profession to be more courageous and agitate for legal reform.
"If we don't affect changes, we are going to have a significant loss of faith in the courts as the significant provider of justice, and that is a matter of great concern."

Judge Gibson's warning would not be unfamiliar to lawyers in Malaysia who can recall former Chief Justice Eusoff Chin's gross distortion of Malaysia's defamation laws, which then led to a number of other questionable decisions, and consequently loss of faith in Malaysia's courts. 

The situation was somewhat reversed when Eusoffe was ejected after a concerted effort by Malaysia's lawyers and journalists, who were assisted in no small part by a story from Australia's ABC Radio Asia Pacific, reported by Di Martin.  

A landmark decision of the NSW Supreme Court against Malaysia's Vincent Tan also played a part.

The situation in Australia's courts today, especially in the State Of NSW, is as bad if not approaching that of Malaysia under the reign of Eusoffe Chin.An analysis of how bad may be found in an submission by this writer that can be found on the Department Of Justice NSW website at the links below:

Review of model defamation provisions - NSW Justice

www.justice.nsw.gov.au › defamationreview

Ganesh Sahathevan [PDF, 125kb] · Gary Duffy [PDF, 645kb] · Google [PDF, 142kb] · John O'Shannassy [PDF 30kb] · Law Council of Australia ...



The Australian Bar and the Law Society Australia have been frequent and forceful critics of judicial corruption in Malaysia'. It is left to be seen whether they are going to be as forceful as courageous as their Malaysian counterparts in removing their Eusoffe Chins.

END

Posted by Ganesh Sahathevan at 4:48 PM 

Drastic changes to Australia's legal training and admission rules  a revelation to  lawyers and potential clients in ASEAN who  have been led to believe that Australian judges and lawyers are worth the higher fees , first class travel,and five star  hotel stay they demand