Phillip Frech found guilty of littering, lawyer Caroline Tassone castigated by court

A couple whose challenge to quarantine made headlines has left an Adelaide judge stunned in a new case sparked by a cigarette.

A couple who made headlines for challenging quarantine restrictions are now embroiled in a controversy over a cigarette flicked from a car window, in a case which left a judge “gobsmacked” over their failure to disclose their marriage.

Philipp Frech employed his wife, Caroline Tassone, to run his defence without telling the court of their relationship, leading to a dramatic mid-hearing disclosure of their marriage.

Mr Frech was found guilty last month of breaching local nuisance and litter legislation because his car illegally stopped in a bus lane and a cigarette was flicked from the window.

He fought the expiation notice issued by Port Adelaide Enfield Council on April 8, 2019, electing to take the case to the Environment, Resources and Development Court.

Lawyers for the council needed to prove only that Mr Frech owned the car, not that he was the one who littered.

A council parking inspector saw a woman with blonde hair sitting in the car tapping the ash off a cigarette out the window on North Pde, in Port Adelaide.

On April 22, 2020, Mr Frech was called to give evidence and Ms Tassone, who had not disclosed their relationship, was outed during the hearing as his wife.

Lawyers are required to disclose any personal connections to their clients in case they jeopardise their ability to give impartial advice. During the hearing David Billington, for the council, began questioning Mr Frech about who he was married to and why he was not wearing a wedding ring.

Philipp Frech, left, and Caroline Tassone, right, drew the ire of a District Court judge during a trial over a cigarette butt being flicked out the window. Picture: Supplied

Ms Tassone objected to the questions, questioning their relevance.

Judge Michael Durrant allowed the questioning to continue which soon resulted in Mr Frech admitting his wife was representing him.

Judge Durrant allowed Mr Frech to leave the stand and then began to question Ms Tassone. “I am concerned that you are representing someone before this court where you are in a marital relationship,” he said.

“That puts you in an untenable position in relation to your ability to provide fearless and independent advice in relation to the matter.

“I’m also concerned that the cross-examination that may be about to be proceeded with may develop a line that you were the driver of the vehicle. I am frankly gobsmacked that I find myself in this position and having not been told at the outset of that relationship.”

Judge Durrant advised Ms Tassone to seek an adjournment, self-report to the Law Society of South Australia and contact a senior barrister for advice.

Ms Tassone apologised to the court but said she had been acting on the advice of a senior member of her firm that her actions were permissible.

The trial continued with Mr Frech represented by a different lawyer.

It is not yet known whether any penalty beyond the $210 fine will be imposed.

The couple mounted the first challenge to Covid-19-forced quarantine in September last year after returning from Europe where Mr Frech had been undergoing back surgery.

Ms Tassone argued for the couple to be allowed to spend their quarantine at home where Mr Frech could better recover.

SA Health at the time said the couple had refused multiple Covid-19 tests while in isolation.

The Supreme Court dismissed their challenge.