Justices play judge and jury on Carmody
JUSTICES have been caught out passing judgment on each other.
In a Court of Appeal decision, Justices Philip Morrison and David Boddice took aim at the work of then-chief justice Tim Carmody, who cowrote the decision with them.
Justices Morrison and Boddice questioned the relevance and appropriateness of sections of Justice Carmody’s reasons relating to sentencing principals.
But the then-chief justice hit back in a postscript at “those who have or feel the need to express a different view”, rejecting their claims and defending the relevance.
Justice Morrison specifically noted at the end of his judgment, “since preparing these reasons I have had the opportunity to read those of Carmody J ... none of those matters (in specific paragraphs) were raised by, or with, the parties”.
“For that reason this is not an appropriate occasion, in my view, to engage in such analysis.”
Justice Boddice also singled out parts of Justice Carmody’s reasoning, questioning their relevance.
“As those matters were not the subject of submissions at the hearing of the appeal, I do not propose to address those matters,” he said.
In a postscript attached to the end of the judgment, Justice Carmody noted the comments about his reasoning, added after his draft was circulated, and defended his work as “relevant and appropriate”.
While the reasons for the judgment were published last week, the hearing was held on May 15, while Justice Carmody was still chief justice. He stepped down on July 1, but remains a Supreme Court judge as president of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal.