Top SA lawyer Claire O’Connor’s legal face-off on hold
THE top lawyer whose Facebook Post about sexual harassment and gender inequity sparked controversy in the legal profession has not attended a peak body inquiry that could result in disciplinary action.
- Top lawyer accuses judge of harassment, profession of sexism
- Lawyer’s Facebook post ignites gender debate among lawyers
- Analysis: Sour grapes, or a raw nerve exposed?
- Top lawyer does not want judge harassment claim investigated
THE top lawyer whose Facebook Post about sexual harassment and gender inequity sparked controversy in the legal profession has not attended a peak body inquiry that could result in disciplinary action.
Barrister Claire O’Connor SC didn’t attend Monday’s meeting of the Law Society’s SA governing council.
The meeting, taking place on its regular monthly meeting schedule was made to discuss the society’s reaction to Ms O’Connor’s social media post late last week.
After the meeting, society president David Caruso told The Advertiser the inquiry had yet to progress.
“Ms O’Connor SC did not attend council this evening (Monday) therefore the matter is still under consideration by the society. Our next week is in the first week of December.”
Ms O’Connor’s Facebook post, drafted in the wake of her loss to Tim Mellor for the 2018 Law Society of SA presidency, appeared online last week.
She also stated she had been “sexually harassed or bullied”, during her career, by a practitioner who was now a sitting District Court judge.
The post ignited debate, with some lawyers saying she had exposed a “boys’ club” culture of gender inequity while others feared she had set back the cause of women.
Ms O’Connor has said she did not want her harassment claim investigated, and Supreme Court Chief Justice Chris Kourakis has confirmed no formal complaint was made.
The Law Society, meanwhile, tabled the post for discussion by its governing council — a body of which Ms O’Connor is a member — on Monday, with the possibility of disciplinary action.
The Advertiser understands the society’s discussion encompassed neither Ms O’Connor’s concerns about gender equity, nor the harassment claim.
Instead, it focused on “possible negative suggestions” about the profession, individual practitioners and the society’s election process.