NSW NEW SOUTH WALESThis website is not intended to be an advertisement for personal injury legal services in NSW. The Legal Profession Amendment (Advertising) Regulation 2005 prohibits advertising of personal injury legal services in NSW. This referral service is therefore not available for incidents arising as a result of negligence in NSW. THE LEGAL PROFESSION AMENDMENT (ADVERTISING) REGULATION 2005 On the 1st of September 2005 by a 5-2 majority the High Court of Australia upheld the constitutional validity of a NSW ban on lawyers advertising their services in relation to personal injury claims under Part 14 of the Legal Profession Regulation made under the Legal Profession Act which makes it both an offence and professional misconduct for a barrister or solicitor to publish an advertisement that includes any reference to personal injury or to any legal service that relates to an entitlement to recover money for personal injury. NSW GOVERNMENT CENSORSHIP The NSW government led by former Premier Bob Carr, created a series of laws from 2004 to 2005 that have banned lawyers and case brokers from informing people of their rights to personal injury compensation. Prior to this, the government has over several years altered the substantive rights of plaintiffs in personal injury claims by reducing their compensation entitlements under the Civil Liability Act. So not only do we live in a State where an injured person's entitlements and legal rights have been severely erroded, but our government also does not want people KNOWING about their rights in the first place. That's right!! People with legitimate claims aren't meant to know that they may have a potential claim. The government does not want you to ascertain, and pursue, any rights at law. WHY? Quite simply, so that the insurance industry (a powerful lobby group) will profit by reduced claims. The Australian Plaintiff Lawyers Association commenced legal action in 2004 challenging the validity of these advertising laws in the High Court of Australia. On 1st September 2005, the High Court upheld the constitutional validity of the advertising ban on personal injury lawyers. 5 of the 7 judges on the bench agreed that on technical grounds (that is in terms of constitutional law) the NSW government had the power to create such laws. What every Australian should be concerned about is the far-reaching capacity of these laws, as pointed-out by the dissenting minority judge, His Honour, Justice Kirby. When you read this paragraph of the judgment, think to yourself, am I living in a democratic society? And then think twice about the role of the Labor party (the so-called "workers' party"), in denying the average person their rights to justice: Justice Kirby (para 294): "The inhibition on communication is therefore quite remarkable. It would appear to put a legal practitioner in peril of criminal and professional offences were he or she to make a public statement suggesting to an individual, community group or service organisation that legal services might be available to assist a woman subject to domestic violence to obtain an apprehended violence order; to provide advice to a child in relation to sexual abuse; to afford assistance to a person seeking relief for disability discrimination; to aid a woman seeking a visa on the basis of marriage to an Australian citizen where she has suffered domestic violence at the hands of her husband; to provide immigration assistance to persons who might have suffered persecution in their country of nationality; to speak on such subjects to students in a high school legal studies class; to talk to a meeting of community organisations about changes to the law with respect to workers' compensation; to write a letter to a newspaper referring to difficulties faced by lawyers in visiting clients in prisons or mental hospitals; or to submit an article to a legal journal proposing an increase in legal aid in the areas of domestic violence, sexual abuse, disability discrimination and immigration assistance." [314] "I agree with the plaintiffs' submission that many non-lawyers have little, if any, detailed knowledge of what their legal rights, privileges and remedies may be; of what courts (or tribunals) may provide a forum for the pursuit of such rights, privileges and remedies; and of the consequences, risks and costs which may accompany their pursuit. This assertion is borne out by common experience of any member of the legal profession who has had dealings with poor and disadvantaged clients. Typically, their legal needs are quite different from those of corporations, the wealthy, or criminal accused and others entitled to public legal aid. These facts are readily illustrated by the reports of public inquiries conducted in Australia concerning the practical constraints that exist on access to legal rights, privileges and remedies." [315] "In this social context, appropriate advertising by the legal profession plays an important role in informing such individuals of their legal rights and effectively enabling their recourse to the professionals and resources necessary for the exercise of such rights. The importance of this advertising is such as to outweigh the negative consequence of a marginal increase in vexatious claims." [322] "This Court should be as vigilant to protect the rights of vulnerable people like Mr Darcy, as it proved to be in Goulden, in protecting the rights and interests of a large insurance corporation." [297] "As the plaintiffs correctly put it, Pt 14 of the Regulation is "an extraordinarily crude instrument to achieve the claimed end".
NSW residents take note: 1. Our free referral service cannot provide you with legal assistance because of this law. 2. OUR ONLY HOPE of change is if the State government repeals (gets rid of) these outrageous laws. Send your protest letters to: 1. The current Premier: |