1 | Page
Qld Bar Exam - Ethics Questions and Correct
Answers
What is the exam looking for? Ans: a) identify the general
principle behind the ethical/ bar rule and the reason for it;
b) answer the question asked and identify any legislative provision
or rule applicable;
c) apply the content of the ethical/ Bar rule (or at least to state its
key components) in addition to stating the rule; and
d) identify where an active role in pursuing an ethical course is
required of the barrister whether that be vis a vis the solicitor, the
client, third party or the court.
Bale v Mills [2011] NSWCA 226 Ans: Facts: After hearing, leave
was given to "add any references" to certain issues concerning the
application of Browne v Dunn to the proceedings. Both parties
provided further submissions, instead of merely referring the
court to additional authorities or other references.
Key principles:
· Parties should not place before the court any further material
after a hearing without, or outside of, any leave given.
© 2025 All rights reserved
, 2 | Page
· Once a matter is reserved, the parties' rights to argument and to
be heard have been exhausted: Bale v Mills.
Outcome: Court ignored further submissions provided.
Day v Perisher Blue Pty Ltd (2005) 62 NSWLR 731 Ans: Proofs of
evidence:
Case on lawyers who let witnesses communicate with each other
about there evidence on a group conference call.
Rule:
Lawyers must take proofs of evidence from lay witnesses
separately and encourage them not to discuss their evidence with
others (in particular, with other potential witnesses).
Encouraging witnesses to confer / collude can amount to
unsatisfactory professional conduct or worse.
Ken Tugrul v Tarrants Financial Consultants Pty Ltd [No.2] [2013]
NSWSC 1971 Ans: There should be no communication (written or
oral) with a judge's chambers in connection with any proceedings
© 2025 All rights reserved
, 3 | Page
without the knowledge and consent of the other party other than
in specific exceptional cases:
(1) trivial matters of practice, procedure and administration;
(2) ex parte matters;
(3) responding to communication from court or where directed to
by court order / direction;
(4) exceptional circumstances.
AND:
· Sending an inappropriate communication with a disclosure of the
other party's lack of knowledge or consent does not cure any
impropriety.
Legal Services Commissioner v Mullins [2006] QLPT 12 Ans:
Settlement negotiations anticipate a measure of honesty from both
parties.
Honesty extends outside of the courtroom
Cannot make a 'positive' claim on a dodgy claim
© 2025 All rights reserved
, 4 | Page
Tri-star Petroleum Company & Ors v Australia Pacific LNG Pty
Limited & Ors [2017] QSC 136 Ans: When express undertakings as
to disclosure of confidential information:
Default position there is a implied undertaking.
Sometimes an express is needed (by whom?)
• Party receiving compelled disclosure must not use it for an
unrelated purpose, unless it is received into evidence: Hearne v
Street. • Third parties also bound if aware of material's origins in
legal proceedings. • Implied undertaking usually enough to protect
confidentiality, but exceptional circumstances may require express
undertaking (e.g. trade rivals): Mobil Oil
Virgtel v Zabusky (No 2) [2009] 2 Qd R 293 Ans: Facts: After
hearing, Counsel forwarded further submissions to Court in
circumstances where further submissions had not been requested
and leave not been sought.
Key principles: Parties must make their submissions at the hearing
afforded them by the Court. Further submissions may only
provided if court requests or leave granted.
Outcome: Court declined to receive further submissions.
© 2025 All rights reserved
Qld Bar Exam - Ethics Questions and Correct
Answers
What is the exam looking for? Ans: a) identify the general
principle behind the ethical/ bar rule and the reason for it;
b) answer the question asked and identify any legislative provision
or rule applicable;
c) apply the content of the ethical/ Bar rule (or at least to state its
key components) in addition to stating the rule; and
d) identify where an active role in pursuing an ethical course is
required of the barrister whether that be vis a vis the solicitor, the
client, third party or the court.
Bale v Mills [2011] NSWCA 226 Ans: Facts: After hearing, leave
was given to "add any references" to certain issues concerning the
application of Browne v Dunn to the proceedings. Both parties
provided further submissions, instead of merely referring the
court to additional authorities or other references.
Key principles:
· Parties should not place before the court any further material
after a hearing without, or outside of, any leave given.
© 2025 All rights reserved
, 2 | Page
· Once a matter is reserved, the parties' rights to argument and to
be heard have been exhausted: Bale v Mills.
Outcome: Court ignored further submissions provided.
Day v Perisher Blue Pty Ltd (2005) 62 NSWLR 731 Ans: Proofs of
evidence:
Case on lawyers who let witnesses communicate with each other
about there evidence on a group conference call.
Rule:
Lawyers must take proofs of evidence from lay witnesses
separately and encourage them not to discuss their evidence with
others (in particular, with other potential witnesses).
Encouraging witnesses to confer / collude can amount to
unsatisfactory professional conduct or worse.
Ken Tugrul v Tarrants Financial Consultants Pty Ltd [No.2] [2013]
NSWSC 1971 Ans: There should be no communication (written or
oral) with a judge's chambers in connection with any proceedings
© 2025 All rights reserved
, 3 | Page
without the knowledge and consent of the other party other than
in specific exceptional cases:
(1) trivial matters of practice, procedure and administration;
(2) ex parte matters;
(3) responding to communication from court or where directed to
by court order / direction;
(4) exceptional circumstances.
AND:
· Sending an inappropriate communication with a disclosure of the
other party's lack of knowledge or consent does not cure any
impropriety.
Legal Services Commissioner v Mullins [2006] QLPT 12 Ans:
Settlement negotiations anticipate a measure of honesty from both
parties.
Honesty extends outside of the courtroom
Cannot make a 'positive' claim on a dodgy claim
© 2025 All rights reserved
, 4 | Page
Tri-star Petroleum Company & Ors v Australia Pacific LNG Pty
Limited & Ors [2017] QSC 136 Ans: When express undertakings as
to disclosure of confidential information:
Default position there is a implied undertaking.
Sometimes an express is needed (by whom?)
• Party receiving compelled disclosure must not use it for an
unrelated purpose, unless it is received into evidence: Hearne v
Street. • Third parties also bound if aware of material's origins in
legal proceedings. • Implied undertaking usually enough to protect
confidentiality, but exceptional circumstances may require express
undertaking (e.g. trade rivals): Mobil Oil
Virgtel v Zabusky (No 2) [2009] 2 Qd R 293 Ans: Facts: After
hearing, Counsel forwarded further submissions to Court in
circumstances where further submissions had not been requested
and leave not been sought.
Key principles: Parties must make their submissions at the hearing
afforded them by the Court. Further submissions may only
provided if court requests or leave granted.
Outcome: Court declined to receive further submissions.
© 2025 All rights reserved
