AUSCRIPT AUSTRALASIA PTY LIMITED
ACN 110 028 825

T: 1800 AUSCRIPT (1800 287 274)         
E: clientservices@auscript.com.au           
W: www.auscript.com.au	

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

O/N H-888220

	FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

	CEREMONIAL SITTING OF THE FULL COURT TO FAREWELL

	THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SIOPIS

PRESIDING JUDGES:

The Honourable James Allsop AO, Chief Justice
The Honourable Justice North
The Honourable Justice Siopis
The Honourable Justice Greenwood
The Honourable Justice Besanko
The Honourable Justice Flick
The Honourable Justice McKerracher
The Honourable Justice Barker
The Honourable Justice Banks-Smith
The Honourable Justice Colvin

GUESTS OF THE BENCH:

The Honourable Wayne Martin AC, Chief Justice of Western Australia
The Honourable Robert French AC
The Honourable Malcolm Lee QC
The Honourable Christopher Carr
The Honourable Robert Nicholson AO
The Honourable John Gilmour QC

PERTH

9.33 AM, MONDAY, 30 APRIL 2018
ASSOCIATE:   The Court’s farewell to the Honourable Justice Siopis.

ALLSOP CJ:   Welcome to this ceremonial sitting of the court to mark the retirement of our colleague Justice Siopis.  Joining myself and the judges of the Western Australian district registry on the bench are a number of senior judges of the court who have come to honour Justice Siopis:  Justices North, Greenwood, Besanko and Flick.  I welcome to the bench the Chief Justice of Western Australia, the Honourable Wayne Martin AC, and we are also joined on the bench today in the largest number of judges and former judges who have ever sat in this room, hence the crush: the former Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia, the Honourable Robert French AC; the Honourable Malcolm Lee QC; the Honourable Dr Christopher Carr; the Honourable Robert Nicholson AO; and the Honourable John Gilmour QC.  I acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land on which we meet, the Whadjuk people of the Noongar nation, and pay my respects to their elders past and present.  

I acknowledge the presence here today of members of Justice Siopis’ family, your wife Anne, daughters Joanna and Katherine, Katherine’s partner Rupert and your son Stephen.  I also acknowledge your many friends in the audience in attendance this morning, together with many of your former associates.  I acknowledge the presence of many of our federal and state judicial colleague, the president of the Western Australian Court of Appeal, the Honourable Michael Buss; Chief Judge of the Family Court of Western Australia, the Honourable Stephen Thackray; Chief Judge Sleight of the District Court of Western Australia; and judges and retired judges of the Supreme Court, Federal Circuit Court and District Court.  May I particularly acknowledge today the presence of the former Presidents of the Western Australian Court of Appeal, the Honourable Chris Steytler AO QC and the Honourable Carmel McLure AC QC. 

I also note a number of apologies of those who wished to be present today, including the Attorney-General of the Commonwealth, the Honourable Christian Porter; the Chief Justice of Australia and former judge of this court, the Honourable Susan Kiefel AC; the Honourable Patrick Keane AC, former Chief Justice of the Court and now Justice of the High Court; Chief Justice of the Family Court, the Honourable John Pascoe AC; the Honourable Will Alstergren, the Deputy Chief Justice of the Family Court and Chief Judge of the Federal Circuit Court; the Honourable Justice David Thomas, President of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; and the Chief Magistrate of Western Australia, Chief Magistrate Heath.  

I also acknowledge those at the Bar table, Minister for Jobs and Innovation, Senator the Honourable Michaelia Cash, representing the Attorney-General; Mr Peter Quinlan SC, the Solicitor-General of Western Australia; Mr Matthew Howard SC, President of the Western Australian Bar Association; Mr Konrad de Kerloy, the Treasurer of the Law Council of Australia; and Mrs Hayley Cormann, President of the Law Society of Western Australia.  

Welcome all to this important occasion in the life of the court.  

Justice Siopis, you were sworn in as a judge of this Court on 15 April 2005, a little over 13 years ago.  Like your former colleague Justice Gilmour, who is here today, your journey to this court was an international one.  Born in South Africa and educated there and at Oxford, you practised as a solicitor in London and a barrister in South Africa before coming to Perth, at that time taking up a lecturing position at the University of Western Australia.  From the academy, you went on to become a member of the partnership at Parker & Parker before joining the Western Australian bar.  At Parker & Parker, you undertook the role the in-house counsel, just as then Mr Chris Steytler did.  It was a prized position of independence and skill and advocacy within one of the finest firms in Australia.  Thus, you have had the unique experience of serving in four different branches of the legal profession: the academy, solicitor, bar and judge, and having been admitted to practise in three different nations: South Africa, United Kingdom and Australia.  At your swearing-in, you were lauded as an outstanding black-letter lawyer, a characterisation of your legal technique that I think you would be proud of.  This reputation has stayed with you during your time on the bench, and your juristic ability is readily and immediately apparent from a reading of any of your clear and well-reasoned judgments – if I may respectfully say so.  

As a judge of this registry, you have been required to undertake the widest range of work across the expanse of this Court’s jurisdiction.  This has included significant judgments in corporations law, insolvency, bankruptcy, admiralty, industrial law, taxation, trade practices, native title, administrative law and migration.  Your judicial output has spanned the whole width of the work of the court.  While a black-letter lawyer, on whatever subjects, your judgments display – to use the words of one of your dear colleagues sitting here with you – a finely honed, indeed, sometimes indignant sense of justice, especially for the downtrodden or the badly treated.  

You have been particularly active in corporations and insolvency law, reflecting your extensive experience in this area and the nature of this court’s work in Perth.  Your judgments have addressed questions of corporate governance, take-overs, schemes of arrangement, corporate insolvency.  Many of these matters have been related to the mining commerce of this state.  Your judgments have dealt with aspects of the insolvency of the Great Southern Limited and matters associated with the Oswal litigation.  

Most recently and in one of your final decisions, you were a member of a Full Court that was tasked, yet again, with exploring the nature of the trustee’s right of indemnity and the priorities regime to be applied when a trustee company for a trading trust becomes insolvent.  These issues had been debated for decades and required a comprehensive analysis of authority and principle.  Your reasons reveal deep appreciation for the principles of equity, particularly equitable subrogation and your understanding of its interaction with company law.  It was one of the highlights of my time on the bench at any time, to sit with you on this case and discuss equitable principle.  Equity is a mystery to some; to you, it is the living breath of justice.  

Outside of corporations law, your jurisprudential contributions have been similarly varied and significant.  As an admiralty judge in The Ship “Houston”, you determined the claims of delivery up of a vessel and for damages for conversion and detinue, as properly characterised as proprietary maritime claims under the Admiralty Act 1988 (Cth).  In The Ship “Hako Endeavour”, your separate reasons, concurring with Justices Rares and Buchanan, focused on whether in the circumstance the respondent could be subrogated to a maritime lien for wages existing in favour of crew.  It was another commanding judgment, demonstrating your particular command of this field of the law.  

In trade practices, your judgment in ACCC v Boost Tel importantly discussed the question of misleading and deceptive conduct in the telecommunications field.  You have made huge contributions to public-law jurisprudence.  Your early decision in Civil Aviation Safety Authority v Hotop was significant for its conclusion that the Administrative Appeals Tribunal’s power to stay the operation of an administrative decision included the power to make a positive order until the hearing of the application for review.  

Justice Siopis, from this very short survey of your decisions, one can see the breadth and department of your contribution to the work of a court.  In addition, you have been actively involved in a number of the important judges’ committees during your time on the court, including the finance committee, the international development committee, policy and planning committee, the library, the rules, the admiralty, the bankruptcy and the equity and the law committees.  As I have said on other occasions, participation in these committees is critical for the effective functioning of a court, and you have my sincere gratitude for your involvement in that important work.  

Your unwavering pursuit of the correct scholarly solution, preferably supported by equitable doctrine, is matched almost by your commitment to a happy workplace and an outlet in humour.  The Siopis laugh echoing from the chambers has achieved notoriety, as is demonstrated today.  It seems to your colleagues that the day is rare when the laugh is not heard reverberating down the passage-ways of this or any other registry of the Court or even in court.  It is a sound which reinforces your humanity and good humour.  

The role you have assumed of senior judge in this registry has seen your additional interaction with other courts and bodies on a broader legal and professional topics beyond the work of the Court, and your connections and friendships amongst the judiciary and the profession have also extended well beyond this Court.  You have embraced those duties conscientiously, with enthusiasm and thoughtfulness, and have diligently sought and conveyed the input of your judicial colleagues whenever necessary.  

You have frequently performed your role amongst your colleagues in what is becoming an old-fashioned and personable way.  Rather than broadcasting emails advising of matters or seeking input, you have done so by direct personal visits and face-to-face discussion.  More time-consuming, but often more instructive, and you have also shown a keen interest in all the staff of this registry, not just your judicial colleagues.  That additional consideration has also added to the harmony of the work of the court in this city.  

What I suspect may be missed by your judicial colleagues upon your departure may, however, be the lack of your presence and warm personality in this registry.  Your sense of humour, friendliness, kind disposition and capacity to just be good company is well known and loved.  Justice Banks-Smith, at her Honour’s welcome in February this year, remarked that one of the joys of coming to the court was to hear your booming laugh again, as if she was just back at Parker & Parker.  These qualities of your Honour are ones we have become familiar with over the last 13 years, and they have contributed greatly to the morale of the judges in Perth and the spirit of your colleagues around Australia.  

Justice Siopis, these personal traits are accompanied by your commitment to common humanity, to decency and to justice, most important things in the law that can’t be defined.  Together they show your commitment to appreciating the necessary human characteristics of the law and of being a lawyer.  Justice Siopis, thank you for your service to the Australian people and to the court.  Thank you also for your friendship and help.  We wish you and Anne the very best in the next endeavours in your life.  

The Honourable Michaelia Cash on behalf of the Attorney-General.

THE HON M. CASH:   May it please the court;  it is a great privilege, to be here today on behalf of the Australian government to fare-well the Honourable Justice Antony Siopis and to celebrate his long and eminent legal career, as a lecturer, solicitor and barrister and judge of the Federal Court of Australia.  The attorney-general, the Honourable Christian Porter, regrets that government business prevents him from attending this ceremony.  He has asked that I convey the government’s sincere appreciation for your Honour’s contribution to the work of this court and pass on his very best wishes for a fulfilling retirement.  

The high regard in which your Honour is held is demonstrated by the number of esteemed guests in attendance today.  May I particularly acknowledge the Honourable Robert French AC, former chief justice of the High Court of Australia, the Honourable Wayne Martin AC, chief justice of Western Australia, the Honourable Stephen Thackray, chief judge of the Family Court of Western Australia, other current and former members of the judiciary, members of the legal profession and, of course, your Honour’s family and friends, who proudly share this occasion with you.  

During your time as a judge of the Federal Court, your Honour’s sharp legal mind and, as has been stated, strong sense of justice have inspired many in the legal profession, including, significantly, your three children, who have followed you into the law.  It is these qualities, that have marked your Honour’s distinguished career and to which today we pay tribute.  

Your Honour attended St Patrick’s Christian Brothers College in Kimberley, South Africa, where, as a mark of your leadership skills, you were appointed head boy.  Following completion of your secondary schooling, you spent a year abroad, as an American field-service exchange student at Sidwell’s Friends’ School in Washington, DC, marking the first chapter in your Honour’s career spanning multiple legal systems across the world.  Your Honour returned to South Africa and attended Rhodes University, where you obtained a bachelor of arts and a bachelor of laws with honours in 1972.  Shortly thereafter, I understand, you were on the move again, this time to London, to study at the University of Oxford.  It was there, that you completed a bachelor of arts in jurisprudence with honours, graduating in 1976, followed by a bachelor of civil law in 1977.  I understand it was also a turning point in your life at this time, because you met your wife, Anne.  

In 1973, you were admitted to the South African bar and practised as an advocate at the Eastern Cape bar in Grahamstown.  During this time, I understand, you were an advocate for persons facing the death penalty in South Africa, a mark of your strong sense of justice and integrity.  Following your move to London and admission to the Supreme Court of England and Wales in 1980, you worked as an articled clerk at Baker and McKenzie, then as a solicitor.  

In 1982, you again decided it was time for another change, and you moved to Australia with your wife, Anne.  It was here, that you commenced a role as a lecturer in the business school at the University of Western Australia.  Motivated by a desire to return to legal practice, your Honour was admitted to the Supreme Court of Western Australia and the High Court of Australia in 1985.  You then joined Parker and Parker in Perth as a solicitor, before being made partner and then in-house counsel, specialising in commercial litigation, administrative law, banking, corporate law, defamation and equity.  

During your time at Parker and Parker, your Honour formed an indispensable part of legal teams, handling some of are the biggest commercial litigation disputes of that era.  Your colleagues from that time recall again unbridled raucous laughter frequently erupting from your office.  There is a pattern of behaviour here.  You had a gift for finding amusement, I am told, and oddity in all manner of legal problems and, enjoyingly, sharing it with your colleagues.  

Your Honour joined the independent bar in Western Australia in 1995 and soon developed a reputation as a first-class lawyer.  As a result of this reputation, you were subsequently appointed lead counsel assisting the royal commission into the finance-broking industry in 2001.  As a mark of your Honour’s brilliance and clear and independent thinking ability, your Honour took silk in 2002.  This was, undoubtedly, a significant milestone in your career.  In 2003, you were appointed as a member of the law society of Western Australia and, later, as a member of the legal practitioners’ complaints committee.  These roles were a sign of your dedication to the legal profession and to your colleagues in the law.  

Your Honour appeared on the bench for the first time as an acting judge of the Supreme Court of Western Australia for three months in 2005.  Shortly thereafter, you were appointed as a judge of this esteemed court.  Your Honour’s fairness and humility have made you an invaluable appointee to the federal judiciary.  During your time on the bench, you have demonstrated exemplary leadership skills and have voiced and represented the interests of the Federal Court on a number of occasions.  

Your Honour is known by your peers and colleagues as someone who discharges your functions in a highly competent and professional fashion and with a minimum of fuss.  You are commended for your fairness, courtesy and composure, even during challenging and sometimes emotionally charged litigation.  Since your appointment, you have demonstrated these qualities in the matters that you have presided over and have proven your ability to remain calm, even when engaging with challenging and, sometimes, emotional litigants.  

Your Honour has presided over a number of significant cases, including Zentai v the Republic of Hungary, where the court upheld the validity of section 19 of the Extradition Act, on the basis that it was addressed to state magistrates as persona designata.  The decision was subsequently upheld by the Full Court of this court and the High Court of Australia.  Another example of your Honour’s important contribution to the law was in Fernando v the Minister, in which the court held, for the first time in Australia, that a person who was unlawfully detained but who could have been lawfully detained was only entitled to nominal damages for their detention.  

It has been remarked, that your Honour has made a significant and beneficial contribution to the law and to the wider community.  I understand you claim that one of your finest achievements as a judge was to flexibly apply the Federal Court rules to ensure that self-represented litigants and – with meritorious cases were able to have their matters proceed to trial.  However, I am also reliably informed that your family jest that your greatest contribution to the legal profession has been encouraging your three children to work in the law.  I hear that you are exceptionally dedicated to your family and have taken great pride in inspiring your children to follow your passion in the law.  

Outside of your work, your Honour is attributed with a deep love for your local adopted football team, the West Coast Eagles – just to be clear – and exemplifies what I’m told is the tribal community divide between the Eagles and the other local team, the Fremantle Dockers.  I am advised that your Honour’s football passion bubbled to the surface in this very courtroom some years ago, when your Honour was hearing a case concerning the application of company funds by a receiver.  One of the complaints on the court papers was that the receiver had expended company funds for the receiver’s own benefit by purchasing and using a corporate box at the Fremantle Dockers’ home games.  When you were informed by counsel that the allegation was not being pursued, your Honour pronounced, with apparent delight, I am told – and I quote from the official court transcript: 

As an Eagles fan, I was waiting for that one, but I would have found that it wasn’t a benefit, to go and watch Fremantle anyway.   

Still on football – I have come to know your Honour and your beautiful wife Anne personally, through biannual social occasions held over many years now among a circle of lawyers and their spouses who compete in their own AFL-tipping contest.  At each season’s end, we award among ourselves a trophy to the most successful tipper.  It does happen, that your Honour, a latecomer to Australian rules, in fact, the person in the tipping contest who knew nothing at all about Australian football for longer than anyone else in the contest, has taken the most trophies of all contestants.  Your Honour delights in this success and is a keen competitor, has never and apparently will never divulge the method applied to achieve it.  

Aside from football, I am told that your Honour is also a devotee of Western Australia’s iconic Cottesloe Beach, where you partake in a morning swim and gym ritual almost every day.  Your family has observed that your enthusiasm for Cottesloe is so great that you have even referred to the beach in one of your own judgments.  I understand your Honour has many plans for your retirement, including travel with the family and improving your culinary skills, which – I am advised by a reliable source – and I quote – have a way to go.  Your Honour will also, undoubtedly, consider to pursue your interests in reading and photography, including compiling your family’s annual photo book.  

A common thread to your achievements has been your dedication to the law and justice.  You will be greatly missed by your colleagues, who have benefitted from your warmth and humour whilst serving on the bench.  On behalf of the Australian government and the Australian people, I thank you for the extraordinary contribution you have made to the administration of justice in Australia.  As your time as a judge of the Federal Court draws to a close, you leave with the respect, admiration and gratitude of the judiciary, the legal profession and the Australian people.  May it please the court.

ALLSOP CJ:   Mr Howard, President of the Western Australian Bar Association.

MR M. HOWARD SC:   May it please the court;  it is my privilege, to appear on behalf of the Western Australian and Australian bar associations at this ceremonial sitting to farewell your Honour.  It is also a particular personal pleasure.  Following the recent farewell for Justice Gilmour, your Honour sought me out and gave me some ideas as to how you would like the bar to farewell you.  I trust I have complied with your Honour’s injunction this morning.  

At the outset, I need to inform the court of a position of potential professional difficulty in which I find myself in appearing this morning;  that is I hold a brief which challenges the validity of amendments made to section 72 of the constitution in 1977 by which the maximum age for federal judges was set at 70 years.  I’m in a position to tell the court that the applicant, Anne Siopis, who – I am instructed – is known to your Honour by marriage, challenges the amendment on the basis that it 
infringes a certain number of her implied constitutional freedoms.  Hence, all that I say this morning is without prejudice to those proceedings, which will be brought before a court of competent jurisdiction shortly, after section 78B notices have issued.  

Leaving aside such questions – the surprise is not that your Honour’s constitutionally required retirement, albeit perhaps on a provisional basis, but rather, remains at your Honour’s appointment.  That is not in any way to suggest your Honour was not eminently qualified for appointment.  Legend has it, that your Honour came to the favourable attention of the then Commonwealth Attorney-General by sitting next to him at a dinner.  So much might be readily imagined, for if your Honour has faults, being a poor companion at a meal is, certainly, not one of them.  

Rather, there was some surprise that the learned attorney was charmed in circumstances where not very long before, while he was the Minister for immigration, you had, as counsel on a pro-bono matter, had the Minister come to this court and explain why he should not be cited for contempt at having removed your applicant for judicial review.  Your Honour is a man of grand passions and is sometimes readily excited.  It is fair, to say that your Honour’s grand passions were much excited by the department’s actions, and no one was left in any doubt as to your Honour’s views.  Nonetheless, as we know, the rest is history.  

In the vein of your Honour’s excitable passions, there is a story told – no doubt – apocryphal – of your Honour appearing as counsel before your friend, Justice Ipp, again, perhaps, a person known for an excitable side to his personality.  As could happen, your application had not started well, in that the judge seemed firmly and volubly against you.  This caused a reaction from your Honour, which then led to a perfect feedback loop or chain reaction of heat, volume and – dare I say it – intransigence.  Justice Ipp, apparently, stepped out of the loop first and indicated that he was now coming to the view that he should grant your application.  Your Honour was still in the former moment and was not going to accept any weak backing down by the judge.  That led, so it is said, to the judge revising his view as to whether he really was minded to grant your application.  That caused your instructor to desperately leap the bar table from behind, grab a big handful of your Honour’s robe and tell you, not so subtle voice, to shut up and sit down.  

That excitable side to your Honour’s personality has not been apparent on the bench, however.  You have been a patient and careful judge over your very many years of service.  That has been especially evidenced in the way that your Honour has dealt with self-represented litigants, some of whom have directed language at your Honour that would make Malcolm Blight blush.  But your Honour has remained calm and judicial throughout.  There perhaps can be no sterner test of one’s commitment to deliver justice with no fear, favour or personal prejudice when that is to be done in the face of obvious and demonstrated hostility.  Your Honour repeatedly has passed that test with flying colours.  Indeed, your Honour has been known to quip to registry staff that the growth in self-represented litigants in this court could be attributed to 
the satisfaction they felt with the way their claims were dealt with, so that they kept coming back despite their obvious lack of success.  

As we have heard, your Honour’s time on the bench has not dimmed your passion for your adopted Australian-rules football.  For anyone with time to listen, your Honour will critique various decisions made by the AFL over a number of years which have inflicted many, apparently, grievous slights and insults on your beloved Eagles.  Time does not permit me to even give a small sample of these conspiracy theories.  

Notwithstanding having never tried a jury case as a judge, your Honour has always been generous with your advice to your fellow judges about the jury system.  I know that Carmel McLure, when president of the Court of Appeal, looked forward to the biannual lunch when she was able to receive the benefit of your Honour’s views on that topic and many others.  

Your Honour has been a huge presence in the legal profession and in the registry of this court.  Your trade-mark booming laugh has been emblematic of that and has been missed from every workplace that your Honour has left.  It will be missed, I know, from this court.  While your Honour was at Parkers’, apart from your exploits at morning teas and Christmas parties, your Honour was known as being unable to walk past the door of an office which contained two people talking without joining that conversation.  Your Honour may be pleased to know that doing a Siopis is now a fully recognised thing again on the 23rd floor of Francis Burt Chambers.  In this registry, your Honour has, probably, convened by this mechanism more full courts than in the whole history of the national court previously.  

Aside from being able to pass on tips to the Eagles coaching staff, I am sure your Honour will continue your vigorous and disciplined exercise regime in retirement.  To hear your Honour tell it – on most mornings, you run along the beach at North Cott and then swim.  Certainly – the learned senator seems to have understood that to be the case.  Images of the beach ironman event are invoked.  Some who have been able to observe this routine have been surprised to see, though, that it mostly comprises of your Honour dropping a towel on the beach and trotting down to water’s edge – that’s the run component – to wade into the water for a minute or two – that’s the swim component – to emerge a moment later looking for coffee and breakfast.  It may be, that retirement will permit a slight expansion to the regime.  

The bar acknowledges and is most grateful for your Honour’s long and conscientious service.  We have always enjoyed appearing before you.  Our system of justice and litigants have been the beneficiaries of your Honour’s dedication.  Your Honour’s growing family is spread around the world, and we wish you safe travels and a splendid, healthy, well-deserved retirement.  May it please the court.

ALLSOP CJ:   Thank you, Mr Howard.  Mr de Kerloy, Treasurer of the Law Council of Australia.

MR K. DE KERLOY:   May it please the court;  it’s my privilege to represent the law council of Australia to farewell your Honour on your Honour on your retirement as a judge of this court.  Your Honour was one of many eminent South African lawyers who found their way to Western Australia in the 1980s.  Melbourne was too cold.  Sydney was too busy, and Brisbane was too sticky.  Perth in the 1980s not only had the climate which replicated the climes of the cape and which appealed to many South Africans, but business activity was surging;  there was a significant increase in the demand for legal services.  

Indeed, the pace was – of growth was such that the supply of law graduates could not keep up with demand, and the demand was not just at the junior end.  Experienced lawyers were also in demand.  A number of Perth firms but particularly two of Perth’s leading firms, Parker and Parker and Freehill, Hollingdale and Page, the predecessor firms of today’s Herbert Smith Freehills, saw the opportunity to fill the void with a diaspora of very senior lawyers who were emigrating from southern Africa at the time.  Freehills grabbed and made partners the Honourable Kerry White, Rob Cringle QC, John Symington and Peter Mansell.  Parkers’ grabbed and made partners of the Honourable Chris Steytler AO, the Honourable David Ipp AO, Harry Dixon SC, Michael Odes QC, the Honourable yourself, Peter Jooste QC, her Honour Annette Schoombee and Martin Goldblatt.  Parker and Parker also have employed quite a number of other South African lawyers who have made a mark in Western Australia, including Robyn and Helen Waters, Julian Sher, Paul Mendelow, Graham Rabe and Alan Carp – to name a few more.  Indeed, Parker and Parker became so peopled with South Africans that it became affectionately known amongst its rivals as Porker and Porker.  

Many of the South African lawyers, including your Honour, made very significant contributions to the firms of which they became partners, the profession, the business community and to public service in this state.  You and your South African colleagues not only brought new ideas but also a very deep respect for ethics, humanity and the rule of law.  Indeed, I suspect it was that deep respect, which your Honour shared in spades, which caused them to look beyond the privileged lives which many of them had led in South Africa to a new life as lowly paid articled clerks in Perth, where they were cut little or no slack by the barristers bought in obtaining their Western Australian practising certificates. The South African experience, if I might call it that, is one of the reasons why the law council continues to advocate the liberalised admission rules for foreign lawyers.  That experience has shown that foreign lawyers can and do make a significant contribution to the improvement of the profession.  

As has been noted, you joined Parker and Parker in 1985 and was a partner of that firm from 1986 to 1995.  In 92, the firm appointed you in-house counsel.  Whilst at Parkers’, you practised in the areas of administrative law, banking, commercial law, corporate law, defamation, equity, industrial law, liquor licensing, real-property law, mining and trade practices.  When you retired from the firm, you were regarded as one of the leading litigation lawyers in Perth.  

There still remains two partners of yours from the Parker and Parker days at Herbert Smith Freehills.  I was able to ask them what you were like to be in partnership with.  They’re not prone to effusion.  To quote their answers – “generous spirit, big-hearted, just a beautiful man”.  I’m sure that was meant metaphorically.  One mentioned to me that you, Ken Martin, Harry Dixon would regularly gather in the afternoons to discuss the events of the day.  The sound was apparently akin to the monkey enclosure at the Perth zoo, with roars of hooting laughter emanating from that quarter of the floor.  Each had a distinctive different hoot.  It’s very pleasing, as has been noted both by Justice Banks-Smith in her welcome and by the Chief Justice and by the other speakers today, that after many years of distinguished but – no doubt – grinding service on this court, your Honour retains your great sense of humour.  

The wide range of your Honour’s skills and experience that have been mentioned by Senator Cash made you eminently qualified for appointment to this court, but it is your Honour’s traits that I have mentioned, ethics, humanity and respect for the law, and those that have been mentioned by the chief justice, that made you such a loved judge of this court and one who will be sadly missed.  

I often see your Honour down at Cottesloe Beach, swimming, walking and joking with your mates.  Retirement will, undoubtedly, afford you more time to enjoy that sublime and simple pleasure.  The waters of the cape and off the coast of Western Australia share similar dangerous creatures.  The West Australian variety seem to have developed a taste for surfers.  Please, enjoy the waters carefully.  On behalf of the law council, I extend our gratitude to your Honour for your service to this court, to the Australian legal profession.  We wish you and Anne a long, fulfilling and happy retirement, which will – we hope – will include involvement in the legal profession.  May it please the court.

ALLSOP CJ:   Mrs Cormann, President of  the Law Society of Western Australia.

MRS H. CORMANN:    Thank you, Chief Justice.  May it please the court;  thank you for the invitation to appear today on behalf of the Law Society of Western Australia at this special sitting to farewell the Honourable Justice Siopis from this court.  Today we thank your Honour for the many years of service to this court, and we acknowledge the very significant contribution made to the profession and the broader community through this role.  

I am acutely aware of the fact that I am the fourth speaker this morning from the bar table and that we have heard already this morning a great deal about your Honour’s extensive contributions.  I consider in that case I may also be forgiven for, from about this time yesterday, suffering from a particular medical condition.  This condition just about exactly 13 years ago was beautifully articulated by your Honour at your welcome ceremony.  

That morning, on 15 April 2005, your Honour referred us to the unfortunate condition of advocate’s paralysis.  As was the case back then, the term still has not 
made it into medical textbooks, but it was defined by your Honour as better known simply as blind panic, experienced by those preparing for a court hearing.  Your Honour shared with the court that morning that in the 20 years prior to your appointment, you had suffered that condition at frequent intervals, with the unfortunate consequence that, during these periods, your ability to communicate coherently with your wife, Anne, had been severely impaired.  At the time, your Honour thanked Anne for having put up so well with this occurrence during that 20-year period, although your Honour did admit to becoming a little discouraged on the odd occasion when she would say things to you like “Shake your head.  Your eyes are stuck” or “Are you sure you can still speak?”  

Your Honour, I would hope that, in the transformation from advocate at the bar table 13 years ago to a member of the bench, your own experience of this condition went into remission.  But what was important in the 13 years that followed and what is important today is that those of us in your court can be comforted, knowing you understand and comprehend the blind panic that advocates regularly face when preparing for appearances before you and your respected colleagues.  

For now, what I would like to comment on this morning is the enormous and positive impact of your Honour on those around you, including those who have worked for you and with you, altogether having created an environment that is structured, efficient and focused on the effective and equitable administration of justice.  Having served 13 years as a judge naturally brings 13 years of associates.  Of course, the feedback from them is of the highest quality and praise for your Honour.  Your Honour, reportedly, is – quite simply – excellent to work for.  I understand your Honour and Anne last week had the opportunity to enjoy a meal and celebration of your retirement with many of those associates, together with your former and longstanding executive assistant.  On that occasion, those present were able to express to you their best wishes and comments.  The feedback includes that working with your Honour was an absolute pleasure and it was a privilege to learn from an exceptional legal mind.  Another associate says:

Thank you for such a great year which I spent as your associate and for teaching me about both intellectual rigour and compassion in this role.  

Another says your Honour is very supportive and encouraging of those around you, teaching juniors there are no barriers to what one can achieve, if they set their minds to it.   The many generous comments about your Honour are significant for lots of reasons, not least, though, because the way we treat, train and mentor and the example we set for juniors, associates and members of the profession generally prepare and unite our profession for its future success and development, and the example you set to our profession is widely regarded as having been outstanding.  

During your time here at the court, as we have heard, your Honour has also continued to maintain a wide range of interests outside the law, including, as we know, in carefully safeguarding the morning schedule to ensure an opportunity to regularly attend North Cottesloe Beach.  I reference it again, because I think it’s 
particularly pleasing that we do, given comments made about this routine at your welcome ceremony by then senator the Honourable Chris Ellison, who spoke that morning on behalf of then federal attorney Philip Ruddock.  Senator Ellison, in his address to the court, expressed a small concern, saying: 

I might say on a more personal note, your Honour, I did not see you at North Cottesloe this morning, and I hope that this appointment will not interfere with your regular attendance at the beach in the mornings.   

13 years later, we are all delighted to confirm that it is, in fact, the case this commitment was dutifully kept throughout your time here and in doing so is not only of enormous benefit to your Honour;  it sets a good example of a well-rounded and wholesome judge for those around you.  To advocates who have appeared before you, your Honour is known as incredibly civil and very respectful.  You have delivered hundreds of judgments in highly complicated cases and dealt also with a number of cases in the industrial context.  Some of these cases might have been particularly interesting to your Honour, given your own first-hand experience with union pickets when you were a member of the amalgam and, in particular, having once had to cross a dangerous and volatile picket in the northwest of this state.  I’m aware that, at least in that case, it was done from the safety of an armoured guard vehicle.  

Prior to your Honour’s appointment, your Honour was known as a highly capable advocate and dedicated professional.  As we have heard, there are many stories of your days at the bar and from your time at Parker and Parker, where you worked with many other outstanding lawyers.  You are fondly remembered as an outstanding mentor to juniors, and colleagues recall your passion for the law, your Honour as having a brilliant mind, great attention to detail, and of course, you are remembered for your loud and infectious laugh.  Your Honour and Harry Dixon SC were a great team, who had the highest respect for each other, and finally – your Honour may have worked very hard, but as a mentor, you are reported as having always made yourself available, and you were patient and generous with your time and advice.  

Insofar as the law society is concerned, your Honour remains a valued member, having first joined on your admission to practise in Western Australia back in 1985.  Your Honour has continued to make, over many years, an extensive contribution to the society’s work, including as a member of our council in 2003 and 2004 and as a member of many of our committees.  Your Honour has also made a significant contribution to the society’s CPD program.  

Lastly and on a social note – your Honour is always a friendly face at society events, and we look forward to continuing to see your Honour at these events.  Overall, your Honour has displayed great integrity and independence while carrying out this role over the last 13 years.  Your Honour’s retirement from this court is a sad day for us, and your Honour leaves a lasting judicial legacy.  Ultimately, on behalf of the law society and broader profession, today I am pleased to congratulate your Honour on a very successful judicial career.  We wish your Honour and your family some special 
time together after you leave here, as well as all the very best for your future together.  May it please the court.

ALLSOP CJ:   Thank you, Mrs Cormann.  Justice Siopis.

SIOPIS J:    Thank you all for bestowing on me the honour of your presence at this farewell sitting today.  In particular, I want to acknowledge and thank members past and present of each of the Supreme, Family and District Courts of Western Australia who are here today.  The cordial relations which exist between the different courts in this state has served to enhance my time on the bench.  Chief Justice, Senator Cash, Mr Howard, Mr de Kerloy and Mrs Cormann, thank you for your very kind observations or, in Mr Howard’s case, mostly kind observations and in particular for, other than Mr Howard, the benignly selective approach you have taken in the remarks that you have made.  I will be ordering a copy of the transcript.  I will keep it in a safe place, and on those occasions when Anne asks me to prepare supper while she is out playing bridge and if things don’t go quite so well for me in the kitchen, I will produce the transcript.  

I am very fortunate today that all three of my children, Joanna, Kate and Stephen, are here, as well as my grandson Josh, although I don’t see him – he’s, probably, being safely looked after.  Joanna and Josh have come from Canada, and each of Stephen and Kate has come from London.  Also here today from London is Rupert Coldwell, my daughter Kate’s fiancé.  Thank you all for travelling the long distances that you have to be here today.  Your presence means a great deal to me.  Unfortunately – Joanna’s husband, Clint Burton, cannot be here as he is holding the fort in Canada, but I know he will be here in spirit.  

In late 1981, I was the beneficiary of exceeding good fortune.  I was offered a job as a lecturer at the University of Western Australia, to begin the following year.  I arrived at the old Perth airport on a hot February night in 1982.  I was met by Mary McComish, my former colleague at UWA.  As we entered the airport parking lot, I smelt the eucalypt trees.  It was a smell with which I was familiar from my South African boyhood, and I knew I was back in the southern hemisphere, where I belonged.  I have never looked back.  

I spent three happy years at UWA, and then another stroke of good fortune befell me.  I was offered a job at Parker and Parker.  At that time, Chris Steytler, now the Honourable Chris Steytler AO, former president of the Court of Appeal, and Harry Dixon, now Harry Dixon SC, were partners in the firm.  I’m so pleased that each of Chris and Harry is here today.  Thank you, Harry, for travelling from Sydney to be here.  Chris has been a friend, confidant and mentor to me over the years.  I would not achieved what have I have achieved in the law without Chris’s example and guidance.  Harry, too, has been a friend and confidant and mentor over the years.  One of the real joys for me in being appointed to this court is that I have been able to enjoy the friendship and hospitality of Harry and his wife, Marion, during my numerous trips to Sydney for sittings of the Full Court.  

I cannot pass from referring to my time at Parker and Parker without also mentioning the exceptionally talented group of lawyers with whom I worked at that firm.  That group produced one president of the Court of Appeal of Western Australia, three serving Supreme Court judges and three District Court judges.  In addition, it is a joy, to record that earlier this year, one of my colleagues from Parker and Parker days, Justice Katrina Banks-Smith, joined me as a colleague on this court.  

It has been a great honour and privilege, to have served as a judge of this court.  I have been particularly privileged to work with a cohort of extremely clever, dedicated and congenial colleagues.  I want to thank each of you, both past and present members of the court, most sincerely, for making my time on this court such a pleasure.  I also want to thank each of the chief justices under whom I served for his outstanding leadership of the court during his tenure.  Each has, in his own distinctive way, fostered the values of excellence and congeniality which has characterised and continues to characterise this court.  

I was warmly welcomed as a judge to this registry in 2005 by the Honourable Justices Robert French, Malcolm Lee and Robert Nicholson, as they then were.  Justice French, of course, went on to become the chief justice of Australia, and I’m particularly honoured by their presence on the bench today, along with that of my predecessor, the Honourable Dr Christopher Carr, and my recently retired colleague, the Honourable John Gilmour QC.  I thank each of them for being here today.  If I’m not mistaken, all the persons who have been appointed as judges of this registry who are still with us are present on the bench today.  

It’s frequently said, that judges live in ivory towers and are out of touch with the views of the ordinary person in the street.  But this has not been my experience.  Rather, I have found that I have been the beneficiary of unsolicited feedback from a number of sources.  My first experience of consumer feedback was early in my judicial career.  It occurred whilst I was delivering an extempore judgment in a case in which the applicant was self-represented.  About halfway through the judgment, the applicant delivered himself a number of vulgar expletives.  I was not encouraged by this development, but I decided to struggle on.  As the volume and frequency of the vulgar expletives increased, I realised the applicant was not at all enamoured of the contents of my judgment and that an abridged version of the judgment would have to do.  I hastily adjourned the court and sought the sanctuary of my chambers.  Needless to say, I was somewhat disheartened by the negative tenor of the initial feedback that I had received so early in my judicial career, and I decided to avoid the prospect of receiving any further contemporaneous feedback by not delivering ex-temp judgments when any self-litigant was a party.  

I have also been the beneficiary of gratuitous feedback from another source, namely, the Cottesloe court of review or the CCR for short.  The CCR is a non-statutory court of review surprising six of my fellow early-morning Cottesloe Beach-goers.  The CCR convened weekly at the Blue Duck café, and my judgments for that week were the subject of review.  The judgments were all assessed by the application of that complex administrative-law construct known as “the pub test”.  The rules of procedural 
fairness had no application in the CCR, and the CCR delivered its judgments with a brutal efficiency, in language which paid no heed to judicial comity or judicial sensitivity.  There was only one redeeming feature of the CCR.  It was that the CCR treated any Full Court judgment which overturned any of my judgments previously upheld by the CCR, with scorn and disdain.  I’m pleased to see that all six members of the CCR are here today, and I’m relieved that they refrained from expressing any dissent from the sentiments which have been expressed by counsel today.  

My executive assistant for the whole of my 13 years in the court has been Lee O’Connor.  Lee also worked as my secretary – along with three other barristers – for just over six years when I was at the bar.  When I was appointed as a judge, I asked Lee to come to this court with me;  so we’ve now worked together for more than 19 years.  During those 19 years, Lee has provided me with outstanding support.  Lee is a person of many talents.  Lee is conscientious and diligent with a fine eye for detail.  Fortunately – Lee is also an expert in the dark arts of the court’s judgment style guide, compliance with which is an essential requirement of getting one’s judgment published.  Lee has also consummate organisational skills, but above all, Lee is a wonderful human being with a warm and friendly disposition and a good sense of humour, and we’ve shared many a laugh over the years whilst working on getting out yet another judgment.  

I should mention that I’m not the first judge with whom Lee has worked as an as an executive assistant.  My predecessors were Sir Ronald Wilson and the Honourable John Toohey.  The more observant of you will have picked that each of those two esteemed jurists was a member of a court of which I was not.  So, Lee, I’m sorry to have let you down, but thank you so much for your support and friendship over the last 19 years.  

I have also had the pleasure of working with 13 associates.  They are Tonia Oliveira, Catherine Hall, Claire Wyatt, Alex Mossop, Allyson Ladhams, Sonia Trio, Tiffany Henderson, Zach Doherty, Gemma Stooke, John Carroll, Jay Raja, Charles Dallimore and finally Alyce Lynch.  I thank them all.  Each of them is brimful of talent and possessed of fine personal qualities, and I have and will continue to keep a benign and proud eye on their progress in life.  

This registry has over the years greatly benefitted from the services of registrars Martin Jan, Elizabeth Stanley, Rainer Gilich, June Eaton and Russell Trott.  Martin, Rainer and June are no longer with the court, but I want to thank them as well as Elizabeth and Russell for all the assistance they’ve provided me and the other judges in this court in the administration of our dockets and in particular in providing mediation services.  I wish also to thank the ebullient National Operations Registrar, Ms Sia Lagos, for all her support in adjusting to the implementation of the national-court framework and, in particular, in arranging my docket so that I was able to complete all my judgments comfortably in advance of my retirement date.  

Also want to acknowledge the registry staff, librarians and court officers for the services which you provide to the public and to members of the court.  Without your 
contribution there would be no applications filed, no documents would reach judges’ chambers and there would be no hearings.  In short, there would be no functioning court.  We’re all part of a team.  You have provided and continue to provide sterling work, and for that I thank you.  

Finally, I would like to express my thanks and appreciation to my marvellous wife, Anne.  As I mentioned in my welcome speech 13 years ago, I owe the trustees of the Oliver Ashe scholarship in Kimberley, South Africa, a great debt of gratitude.  They awarded me a scholarship to Oxford University, and it was whilst I was a student there, that I met and fell in love with a beautiful and delightful Welsh girl.  We got married in Cardiff, and a few years later, albeit with some hesitation, Anne agreed to leave the UK and come with me to Australia in 1982.  I said it would only be for three years, but I was wrong.  Anne, without your love and support and sacrifice, I would not have been able to achieve what I have professionally.  But our greatest achievement is that we have raised three compassionate, smart, funny, and thoroughly decent young persons, of whom we are both immensely proud.  For that achievement you can justly take most of the credit.  In life I have been greatly blessed.  Thank you all for coming today.

ALLSOP CJ:   Court will now adjourn.

_________________