Legal Fiction

In my blogs I have tried to show where there is evidence of animus and barratry, if not chicanery, practiced by legal professionals and individuals engaged in strata management. Evidence management is not my strong suit, and I apologize for that, but readers can sift through the facts to discern for themselves what the true story is.

Prior to 2016, when the Civil Resolution Tribunal commenced operation, the Strata Property Act was a form of legal fiction for the majority of owners, who had no reasonable access to justice. In many ways, it still is.

I'm sad to say that strata strife could never flourish as it has without the help of legal professionals and other agents whose business creates inherent conflicts of interest. 

Legal fiction is the foundation of the deceptive oath that lawyers take when they become lawyers but don't honour after that; particularly when serving the strata agency industry, which has a shameful history of abusing the rule of law and the rights and freedoms of owners:

"to conduct ourselves truly and with integrity, to uphold the rule of law and to protect the rights and freedoms of all persons"

Trust in the law is betrayed when officers of the court administer it in ways that are punitive to the law-abiding and permit law breakers to benefit from their own wrongs.

 

I am afraid this trend will continue just as long as strata lawyers like Adrienne Murray get paid to generate and promote pretences and shirk their responsibility for foreseeable, easily avoidable damage caused by acting on the basis that strata lawyers are entitled to violate the law and owe no duty of care to treat any strata owner truly, diligently, and with integrity.

Lawyers churning up litigation or acting in favour of members of the strata management team to the prejudice of owners are violating the SPA, or perverting it at least. Specific examples include, but are certainly not limited to: 

1. Adrienne Murray's letter thwarting s.35 minutes and refusing to comply with s. 36 requests, and  
2. Clark Wilson's brochure advising stratas to withhold legal opinions and delete email contrary to s.36.

These are just 2 examples of many practices that effectively obstruct justice and tamper with evidence; but when legal professionals do it, they characterize it as innocent (a bit laughable) mistakes, litigation "privilege", or best interests (the only interest that is beyond question, other than the law, is their own income).

These lawyers have created one of the heaviest burdens of unfairness, and a thick history of corrupt industry practices, which is often impossible for the average owner to overcome.

 

I was happy originally. I had faith in justice. That faith was replaced with a disappointing expectation that when it comes to SPA officers of the court cannot be relied on to uphold the rule of law, or the rights and freedoms of all persons, largely because of systemic bias, errors in past practice, and factual blindness.  Nothing about that makes me happy at all.

Too many precedents show that animus, privilege, and immunity pervert the law to favour those with the most power and influence and prejudice the most innocent and injured.  

Documents written by Adrienne Murray, Clark Wilson, Becker & Company, and a few others that are obviously damaging and contrary to the SPA raise an alarming apprehension of misconduct, in my mind at least. I don't know about anybody else, in large part because I am not allowed access to strata correspondence.