ATTORNEY GENERAL ADVICE TO QUERY LPCC RE MR. NI KOK CHIN'S INDEPENDEN
X
Inbox
X
Inbox
Reply
| show details 9:32 AM (2 hours ago) |
Mr C L Zelestis, QC Chairperson and Law Complaints Officer: Ms D Howell Phone: (08) 9461 2299 Fax: (08) 9461 2265 Email: lpcc@lpbwa.com 2nd Floor Colonial Building, 55 St George's Terrace, PERTH WA 6000 Office Box Z5293, St George's Terrace, PERTH WA 6831Atten: Ms. Le Miere
The Attorney General of WA the Hon. C Christian Porter MLA
Level 21, Governor Stirling Tower,
197, St. Georges Terrace
Perth WA 6000
Email: Minister.Porter@dpc.wa.gov.au
Dear Sirs
I refer to the above matter and the letter of the Attorney General of WA dated 12.4.2011, a copy of which is attached. The Attorney General is advising the Unity Party of WA to write to the LPCC in the following terms:
a) The LPCC is the statutory body designed to resolve disputes within the legal profession but it does not fulfill this role in that Ms. Le Miere, the representative of that body did not respond to the letter of Mr. Chin dated 21.3.2011 before the directions hearing held before the Deputy Vice President of SAT, His Honour Judge Timothy Sharp on 8.4.2011. A copy of this letter is attached for your perusal and retention.
b) Mr. Chin was trying to contact Ms. Le Miere, a few days before the 8.4.2011 by phone but only managed to speak to one Carlie at the LPCC. Mr. Chin wanted Ms Le Miere to confirm that the LPCC did receive his submission in CIV 1877 of 2010 dated 3.4.2011 before Commissioner Sleight, his facsimile letter dated 30.3.2011regarding CACV 41 of 2010 and his facsimile letter dated 21.3.2011 containing eight questions which needed to be answered before Judge Sharp on 8.4.2011 for the directions hearing.
c) Mr. Chin only received a reply from Ms. Carlie when he called again after not having received a response from Ms. Le Miere, not confirming the receipt of those documents as indicated above but a reply " See you in Court tomorrow".
d) When Mr. Chin attended the court with Ms. Le Miere and Ms. Norton on the 8.4.2011, Ms Le Miere was there to state to Judge Sharp that there be a trial for four days on 11.10.2011 onwards. After that, she excused herself without giving Mr. Chin a chance to response to her submission.
e) Mr. Chin was indicating to the court before Judge Sharp after Ms. Le Miere had left to the effect that since there was no response from the LPCC as required by his letter dated 8.4.2011 to those eight questions, those facts are being admitted by the LPCC and therefore there is no longer any issues to be tried on the 11.10.2011 which was set for three days by Judge Sharp.
f) Mr. Chin was also touching on the aspect that Ms. Le Miere is not doing her duties to the court by being honest and sincere and not to evade the issues at hand so that the directions hearing could progress to a successful conclusion having regard to the fact that on the previous directions hearing on the 26.11.2010, Ms. Le Miere had agreed with Judge Sharp that Mr. Chin was to be given back his practice certificate as soon as possible. It looks like there is a secret communication that occurred in the meantime resulting in Judge Sharp agreeing to Ms. Le Miere's suggestion that the matter be set down for trial under circumstances when all parties are aware that there are no issues to be tried at all on the 11.10.2011. Therefore Mr. Chin had applied for a statement of reason and a transcript of the proceedings before Judge Sharp on 8.4.2011 seeking an explanation as to why the directions hearing on 8.4.2011 did not proceed as scheduled to reach a consensus between the parties when a condition for trial of non-issues was imposed on Mr. Chin.
The Unity Party therefore requires the LPCC to explain the contents of those communications between the parties and Judge Sharp that transpired before the 8.4.2011 and to do those things that are required for the matter before Judge Sharp to be progressed equitably with no perceived disparity in the enforcement of rules or law and in the interests of justice on the following grounds:
a) The matters complained of are not trivial as they are very important for Judge Sharp to trial the issues of the abuse of human rights of Mr. Chin by the LPCC and the LPB instead of the non-issues currently before Judge Sharp.
b) The matters as contained in those written communications before Judge Sharp are not unreasonable as they are rational thinking of Mr. Chin for the purpose of pursuing his human to practice law independently and must not be interfered with by the LPCC to protect their cronies or to practise nepotism upon Mr. Chin.
c) Nothing in the claims of Mr. Chin are vexatious or frivolous in the sense that they are the truths that is aimed at seeking justice where Mr. Chin's rights as a human being and an Australian Citizen has been trampled upon. Mr. Chin is not seeking to annoy the LPCC nor to take advantage of any situation that is not for the common good but his sole purpose is to promote better governance of Western Australia.
d) The Unity Party of WA of which I am its President is seeking to enforce the inalienable rights of the citizens of Australia so that all races in this multi-ethnic society can live in peace so as to oversee that our justice system is performing optimally for the common good of all Australians.
Cheers
PRESIDENT OF UNITY PARTY OF WA
Eddie Hwang.
The Attorney General of WA the Hon. C Christian Porter MLA
Level 21, Governor Stirling Tower,
197, St. Georges Terrace
Perth WA 6000
Email: Minister.Porter@dpc.wa.gov.au
Dear Sirs
I refer to the above matter and the letter of the Attorney General of WA dated 12.4.2011, a copy of which is attached. The Attorney General is advising the Unity Party of WA to write to the LPCC in the following terms:
a) The LPCC is the statutory body designed to resolve disputes within the legal profession but it does not fulfill this role in that Ms. Le Miere, the representative of that body did not respond to the letter of Mr. Chin dated 21.3.2011 before the directions hearing held before the Deputy Vice President of SAT, His Honour Judge Timothy Sharp on 8.4.2011. A copy of this letter is attached for your perusal and retention.
b) Mr. Chin was trying to contact Ms. Le Miere, a few days before the 8.4.2011 by phone but only managed to speak to one Carlie at the LPCC. Mr. Chin wanted Ms Le Miere to confirm that the LPCC did receive his submission in CIV 1877 of 2010 dated 3.4.2011 before Commissioner Sleight, his facsimile letter dated 30.3.2011regarding CACV 41 of 2010 and his facsimile letter dated 21.3.2011 containing eight questions which needed to be answered before Judge Sharp on 8.4.2011 for the directions hearing.
c) Mr. Chin only received a reply from Ms. Carlie when he called again after not having received a response from Ms. Le Miere, not confirming the receipt of those documents as indicated above but a reply " See you in Court tomorrow".
d) When Mr. Chin attended the court with Ms. Le Miere and Ms. Norton on the 8.4.2011, Ms Le Miere was there to state to Judge Sharp that there be a trial for four days on 11.10.2011 onwards. After that, she excused herself without giving Mr. Chin a chance to response to her submission.
e) Mr. Chin was indicating to the court before Judge Sharp after Ms. Le Miere had left to the effect that since there was no response from the LPCC as required by his letter dated 8.4.2011 to those eight questions, those facts are being admitted by the LPCC and therefore there is no longer any issues to be tried on the 11.10.2011 which was set for three days by Judge Sharp.
f) Mr. Chin was also touching on the aspect that Ms. Le Miere is not doing her duties to the court by being honest and sincere and not to evade the issues at hand so that the directions hearing could progress to a successful conclusion having regard to the fact that on the previous directions hearing on the 26.11.2010, Ms. Le Miere had agreed with Judge Sharp that Mr. Chin was to be given back his practice certificate as soon as possible. It looks like there is a secret communication that occurred in the meantime resulting in Judge Sharp agreeing to Ms. Le Miere's suggestion that the matter be set down for trial under circumstances when all parties are aware that there are no issues to be tried at all on the 11.10.2011. Therefore Mr. Chin had applied for a statement of reason and a transcript of the proceedings before Judge Sharp on 8.4.2011 seeking an explanation as to why the directions hearing on 8.4.2011 did not proceed as scheduled to reach a consensus between the parties when a condition for trial of non-issues was imposed on Mr. Chin.
The Unity Party therefore requires the LPCC to explain the contents of those communications between the parties and Judge Sharp that transpired before the 8.4.2011 and to do those things that are required for the matter before Judge Sharp to be progressed equitably with no perceived disparity in the enforcement of rules or law and in the interests of justice on the following grounds:
a) The matters complained of are not trivial as they are very important for Judge Sharp to trial the issues of the abuse of human rights of Mr. Chin by the LPCC and the LPB instead of the non-issues currently before Judge Sharp.
b) The matters as contained in those written communications before Judge Sharp are not unreasonable as they are rational thinking of Mr. Chin for the purpose of pursuing his human to practice law independently and must not be interfered with by the LPCC to protect their cronies or to practise nepotism upon Mr. Chin.
c) Nothing in the claims of Mr. Chin are vexatious or frivolous in the sense that they are the truths that is aimed at seeking justice where Mr. Chin's rights as a human being and an Australian Citizen has been trampled upon. Mr. Chin is not seeking to annoy the LPCC nor to take advantage of any situation that is not for the common good but his sole purpose is to promote better governance of Western Australia.
d) The Unity Party of WA of which I am its President is seeking to enforce the inalienable rights of the citizens of Australia so that all races in this multi-ethnic society can live in peace so as to oversee that our justice system is performing optimally for the common good of all Australians.
Cheers
PRESIDENT OF UNITY PARTY OF WA
Eddie Hwang.
2 attachments — Download all attachments
| AGWA-CACV41OF10-130411L 001.jpg 604K View Download |
 | LPCC-SAT-VR87OF2009-210311L.doc 49K View Download |
No comments:
Post a Comment