Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Nicholas N Chin on June 5, 2012 at 8:12pm

Hi Cate: I am fighting my case. They are trying to get me for no professional misconduct by alleging that I do 16 counts of them.  Its in my written submission. 

Please sign that Avaaz petition for me if you feel that justice needs to be done and then send it forward to your friend and ask them if they need to right this injustice. 

Cate Stuart said:

Nice profile picture Nicholas, are you a practicing Barrister?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nicholas N Chin on June 20, 2012 at 1:57am

WHEN LAWYERS REGULATE THEMSELVES INSTEAD OF THE GOVERNMENT REGULATING THE, THERE IS NO EQUALITY AND JUSTICE.

LAWYER INDEPENDENCE AND JUDICIARY INDEPENDENCE GO HAND IN HAND. YOU CANNOT TAKE OUT ONE AND PRESERVE THE OTHER.

4 days ago

• Unlike
• Comment
• Unfollow
• Flag
• More

You like this

2 comments

http://www.linkedin.com/miniprofile?vieweeID=41868475&context=a...">

GlennUnfollow

Glenn Jones • There is a certain irony in the fact that the judiciary is more regulated than the legal profession in most jurisdictions in Australia. That said, the legal profession is significantly more regulated that it was 25 years ago. The problem is that self regulation is not always very successful or very well understood by the general public. If the public do not understand and/or do not have faith in the manner in which the profession is regulated, then that is a significant deficiency in the process. The profession has been very quick over the years to appear to close ranks around individual members facing accusations and the public perceived this as akin to covering up. 

Is government regulation the answer? There is already regulation, the real question is whether the government should replace the profession as the implementer of that regulation. I tend to the view that, like a number of the major industries (banking, telecoms), there should be an independent regulator that reports to the parliament. I hold the same views about both the medical profession and especially the accounting/auditing profession. More on that later!

3 days ago• Unlike

1

http://www.linkedin.com/miniprofile?vieweeID=103670383&context=...">

Nicholas N Chin • The Profession do close ranks around certain individuals only on the basis of deference which is a corrupt act. This is the display of cronyism and partisanship at its best by a judiciary that does not pay regard to being honest in its decision. The element of Integrity is missing. See What Justice Spigelman says about : The Integrity Branch of Government - The First Lecture in the 2004 National Lecture Series for the Australian Institute of Administrative Law athttp://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/supreme_court/ll_sc.nsf/pages...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nicholas N Chin on July 21, 2012 at 9:41pm

See the links for Justice in Australia and you cannot get justice in Australia.

http://nnchin1.blogspot.com.au/2012/07/the-regulator-is-intimating-...

http://nnchin1.blogspot.com.au/2012/07/current-australian-governmen...

Click here to read more about it and SIGN the TWO PETITIONS:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/The_West_Australia_Judiciary_imple...

http://www.change.org/petitions/shire-rates-issues-for-the-people-o... 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nicholas N Chin on July 22, 2012 at 8:10pm

No Cate. As you will see, I have given an undertaking since 24.11.2010 that I am not entitled to represent that I am a legal practitioner.  My lawyer independence has been taken away.  I can apply for a practice certificate if I were to work for some one under supervision and I have not avail myself of this opportunity. 

Cate Stuart said:

Nice profile picture Nicholas, are you a practicing Barrister?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nicholas N Chin on July 22, 2012 at 11:12pm

Thanks Beverley

Beverley Prescott said:

Good advice - You never know who is looking in here - we sometimes have many viewing but not commenting.  You can always delete anything that you feel necessary to do.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nicholas N Chin on July 22, 2012 at 11:18pm

Mr. Glenn Jones comments is one that unruffles the feathers of the Regulator when it wrote to me stating that I might have breached my undertakings. 

Nicholas N Chin said:

WHEN LAWYERS REGULATE THEMSELVES INSTEAD OF THE GOVERNMENT REGULATING THE, THERE IS NO EQUALITY AND JUSTICE.

LAWYER INDEPENDENCE AND JUDICIARY INDEPENDENCE GO HAND IN HAND. YOU CANNOT TAKE OUT ONE AND PRESERVE THE OTHER.

4 days ago

• Unlike
• Comment
• Unfollow
• Flag
• More

You like this

2 comments

http://www.linkedin.com/miniprofile?vieweeID=41868475&context=a...">

GlennUnfollow

Glenn Jones • There is a certain irony in the fact that the judiciary is more regulated than the legal profession in most jurisdictions in Australia. That said, the legal profession is significantly more regulated that it was 25 years ago. The problem is that self regulation is not always very successful or very well understood by the general public. If the public do not understand and/or do not have faith in the manner in which the profession is regulated, then that is a significant deficiency in the process. The profession has been very quick over the years to appear to close ranks around individual members facing accusations and the public perceived this as akin to covering up. 

Is government regulation the answer? There is already regulation, the real question is whether the government should replace the profession as the implementer of that regulation. I tend to the view that, like a number of the major industries (banking, telecoms), there should be an independent regulator that reports to the parliament. I hold the same views about both the medical profession and especially the accounting/auditing profession. More on that later!

3 days ago• Unlike

1

http://www.linkedin.com/miniprofile?vieweeID=103670383&context=...">

Nicholas N Chin • The Profession do close ranks around certain individuals only on the basis of deference which is a corrupt act. This is the display of cronyism and partisanship at its best by a judiciary that does not pay regard to being honest in its decision. The element of Integrity is missing. See What Justice Spigelman says about : The Integrity Branch of Government - The First Lecture in the 2004 National Lecture Series for the Australian Institute of Administrative Law athttp://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/supreme_court/ll_sc.nsf/pages...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nicholas N Chin on July 23, 2012 at 3:37pm

Yes, you can understand why it went wrong all the time. If they avoided the issues, then the issues are not res judicata. Then we can come back to it again.

Attachments:

• CIV2157OF2012-CHIN&LAW-SUBMISSION-SANDERSONRECUSAL23072012L.doc, 37 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nicholas N Chin on July 23, 2012 at 8:28pm

see this site particularly at:http://wwwnicholasnchin.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/email-and-facsimile...

Nicholas N Chin said:

No Cate. As you will see, I have given an undertaking since 24.11.2010 that I am not entitled to represent that I am a legal practitioner.  My lawyer independence has

been taken away.  I can apply for a practice certificate if I were to work for some one under supervision and I have not avail myself of this opportunity. 

Cate Stuart said:

Nice profile picture Nicholas, are you a practicing Barrister?

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion