LLW3009 - Lawyers’ Ethics & Professional Responsibility - Law Assignment Help

Assignment Task 

1. Lara de Tramp (Lara), a politician, has been having an “on-again, off-again” relationship with Rudi  Giulany (Rudi), the principal of Rudi G Lawyers. Their relationship is currently in the “off” phase. 
2. Rudi G Lawyers is a 2-person law firm providing legal services largely in the fields of conveyancing,  trusts, wills, uncontested probate and estate administration. The other practitioner is Sidney Bowell  (Sidney), an employee solicitor, who is relatively new to the practice. 
3. Lara is ambitious and passionate, so much so that she sometimes forgets to mind her words when  speaking in public. She has just been served with a letter and a “concerns notice” under the  Defamation Act 2005 (Vic) by Schone Legal, the solicitors for Stevie Bannen (Stevie) a rival politician  and sitting Member of Parliament (MP). Stevie is threatening legal proceedings if Lara does not retract  a statement that she made in a public speech asserting that Stevie had accepted bribes from a  property developer, Mike Flinn, and is corrupt. Apparently the source of Lara’s information is an email  from one Jenna Ellipse, Mike Flinn’s former secretary. Stevie is demanding that Lara publish in a  national newspaper an unqualified apology and a retraction of her statement, and pay his legal costs.  
4. “Concerns notice” and Schone Legal’s letter in hand, Lara flounces into Rudi’s office without an  appointment and slaps them onto his table, demanding that he defend her. Rudi takes a quick look at  the documents and tells Lara that he is not a litigation lawyer but can recommend one to her. 
5. With a frown, Lara asks Rudi if he can remember the last time they were together. Rudi remembers it  very well and replies that it was about 3 months back, to which Lara tells him, in no uncertain terms,  that if he ever hopes to regain her “favours”, he had better take up her case. 
6. Rudi, who has been hoping for an “on” phase in their relationship to come round again, has a sudden  vision of his hopes being permanently dashed. He hastily invites Lara to take a seat and tell him what  is going on. Lara accepts the invitation graciously, crossing her legs and smiling at Rudi demurely. 
7. Rudi spends the next 3 hours getting information from Lara about the matter, after which he tells her  that he will do some research and update her. He asks her to come back to his office in 3 days.  Fluttering her eyelashes, Lara sweetly suggests that he drop by her place that weekend so they can  discuss the case in “a more relaxed environment”.  
8. Rudi agrees instantly. However, just before Lara leaves, he tentatively asks her whether she would  rather consult a defamation expert instead, half-hoping that she would say no. Lara simply arches her  left eyebrow and gives him a look, and Rudi surrenders, not unhappily, to his fate. She then sashays  her way out of Rudi’s office. 
9. In the next 3 days Rudi reads up on defamation law. By that weekend, Rudi has formed the view that  Lara has a defence of justification or in the alternative, a defence of honest opinion. However, he fails  to appreciate that Lara had asserted a statement of fact and that while one defence relates to facts that  are substantially true, the other relates to comments or expressions of opinion on matters of public  interest for which proper basis can be demonstrated.
 

Question 1: Having regard to paragraphs 1 to 16 and 18 of the Facts, identify and discuss 4 possible  breaches of the Legal Profession Uniform Law Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules  2015 and the Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic).  

Question 2: Further, discuss whether Rudi should have declined to act for Lara

This (LLW3009) Law Assignment has been solved by our Law experts at My Uni Paper. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.
Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.