Did Justice Wolverine go too far with departing judge?
The monumental dummy-spit by Federal Court judge Ian Jackman about the “inability” of colleague Kathleen Farrell to finish a judgment has divided the legal community.
The majority reckon Jackman was way over the top with his criticism of a colleague who is leaving the bench next week (August 1).
Others told Hearsay that Jackman should be applauded for calling out what they say is a significant problem with some judges on the national court.
Harsh judgment: Federal Court justices Ian Jackman and Kathleen Farrell.
How Farrell was allowed to go almost three years without delivering judgment in the Smart Education case is bewildering – especially when Jackman was able to finish it three weeks after being re-allocated the matter on June 30.
Anything over one year – no matter how complex the case – is considered unacceptable. Most courts will send nudges to judges after three months and get very active in managing the situation at six months.
The “how good am I” touch to the Jackman’s judgment didn’t go unnoticed. As well as his brutal take on why Farrell let the side down; “unwilling” and “unable” appears to be code for incompetent slacker.
“The problem does not appear from the evidence to be one of inability… except perhaps in a euphemistic sense of ‘inability’,” wrote Jackman.
“Rather, the problem seems to be one of unwillingness to discharge the judicial function of giving judgment in the proceedings.”
This from the most junior judge on the court, albeit one who had a stellar career at the bar beforebeing appointed in December.
Farrell actually delivered a judgment on Wednesday in an immigration matter. Hearsay understands she has passed on the usual farewell for retiring judges, and will slip quietly out the door and
Read more on afr.com
