Agony Aunt
Volume 3, Issue 6, (Originally Published on Monday 15th April 2013)
 
Dear Agony Aunt,
 
I currently live at home, and some of my new JD friends have asked me to start a share house with them next semester. I think it would be fun, but I’m kind of worried that living with friends who I also have classes with might be too much time spent together. I don’t want us to all end up getting on each other’s nerves. Should I move in with them?
 
Potential Housemate
 
Dear Potential Housemate,
 
Choosing people to live with is never easy. Especially when it comes to living with friends. Just because they are fun to get boozed with doesn’t mean that you are going to like their quirks and habits. Maybe they clip their toenails at the kitchen bench, and leave their dishes lying around the house to turn mouldy and someone doesn’t pay their bills on time. Or you might wake up to cake on your birthday, have spontaneous sing-a-longs and/or dance-offs in your living room, and have someone to go pick up that parcel waiting for you at the post office.
 
Basically, this is a long-winded way of saying, you just never know.
 
Either way, go for it. Share housing is a rite of passage, and everyone should have at least one ‘this insane housemate I once had <insert nutty story here>’ and one ‘the best housemate I ever had once <insert awesome/sweet/hilarious story here>’ stories to tell.
 
Auntie Ethel
 
Agony Aunt

Peter Botros
Volume 3, Issue 6, (Originally Published on Monday 15th April 2013)

Christine Todd
Volume 3, Issue 6, (Originally Published on Monday 15th April 2013)
 
Lawyers can get a lot of grief for doing the work they do. They consistently rank as one of the most hated professions, despite offering some pretty invaluable services. ‘International Be Kind to Law-
yers Day’ (April 9) was created to remedy this injustice, forcing people worldwide to sacrifice 1/365th of their year to treat their lawyer friends and family as the almost semi-humans that they are.
 
I extended the scope of the day to include law students for completely unselfish purposes this year, alerting people within shouting distance of the occasion, and patiently awaiting pleasantness. Crickets. I wrote about it on the social media, and even texted my grandfather, a former judge who refuses to put his legal years behind him. The little message came up on my phone indicating he’d read the message, but he never responded. Presumably he was too busy laughing.
 
The day itself was as painfully average as any other. The assignments didn’t miraculously disappear, my library fines weren’t suddenly wiped, and I had to buy my own coffee. Barista didn’t even smile.
Worse still, I was unsuccessful in trying to be kind to my lawyer friends. They told me off for interrupting their meeting with a client, so I gave their dinosaur balloon and muffins to a really tired-looking IT specialist on the tram home.
 
So my recommendation for those of you expecting to reap the benefits of International Be Kind to Lawyers Day: don’t expect the world to be kind to you. Be kind to yourself. Take a day of sick leave (to be fully sick, amirite?), buy yourself a nice bottle of wine, schedule a massage and tell yourself that all the hatin’ and all the paperwork is worth it. Cos you love being a lawyer.
 
And don’t forget some of the other relevant international days of celebration that are relevant to lawyers and law students alike:
 
April 13 is Blame Somebody Else Day.
 
April 16 is Stress Awareness Day.
 
June 5 is the Festival of Popular Delusions.
 
And May 9 is Lost Sock Memorial Day. Because what the hell.
 
Christine Todd

Raoul Renard
Volume 3, Issue 6, (Originally Published on Monday 15th April 2013)
 
This Thursday, over a delectable spread of biscuits and lattes, we were fortunate enough to hear from our new Judge-in-Residence, former judge of the Victorian Court of Appeals Bernard Bongiorno AO, about the sometimes startling idiosyncrasies of the civil law.
 
The event was organised by Sophie Molyneux and Karyan Ng of the Global Law Student’s Association, part of the regular Coffee Hour conversations where students can enjoy a coffee with eminent guests from around the legal world.
 
Bongiorno modestly described his interaction with the civil law of much of Europe as a hobby interest, but this was belied by his extensive knowledge of the history of its development, from the Roman law codified by Justinian in the sixth century AD to the Code Napoléon.
 
Bongiorno is lucky to have a flat within the Périphérique in Paris, and perhaps luckier still to share the building with Françoise, a fellow judge. Over the years, they have discussed with zest and occasional shock the various differences between the legal systems of their respective countries.
 
Françoise, for example, scoffed at the seemingly endless provisions for counsel to cross-examine witnesses in our system. Bongiorno, on his part, expressed surprise that in French criminal trials the judges and jury retire together to discuss the case and arrive at a verdict.
 
What is perhaps more interesting for you, future advocates of MLS, is that in France, whilst barristers also wear gowns, they usually do away with the sartorial elegance of, say, a Denny Crane, and opt for jeans, runners and T-shirts underneath! A murder trial taking more than three days is a rare phenomenon, and whilst there is a strong culture of respect for magistrates, barristers and judges alike are prone to engaging in shouting matches across the bench until someone yells ‘Tais-toi!’ [ed.–‘Shut up!’ in English]
 
Finally, a key difference is that the French seem, historically, to have a much better record in terms of the feminisation of the judiciary, with most three-judge trials comprising two females to one male.
 
The Coffee Hour was a fantastic experience to learn from a man of much experience and eminent approachability. I encourage all students to take advantage of the opportunity to participate in an informal conversation with our Judge-in-Residence on TuesdaysThursdays from noon – 3 pm.

Raoul Renard

Nicholas Baum
Volume 3, Issue 6, (Originally Published on Monday 15th April 2013)
 
Concern is growing amongst interested members of the student body that the Student Services and Amenities Fee is not being spent on the services for which it is being charged.
 
The Student Services and Amenities Fee (SSAF), a $273 compulsory payment charged to all full-time tertiary students to support independent student organisations and the provision of student services, is facing criticism that it is not being spent in the interests of law students.
 
The majority of law student groups that provide key services to law students do not receive funding under the SSAF. These services, including social events, careers advice, education assistance and student support, go to the very heart of why the SSAF fee is being charged to students, and yet are not funded by that same fee.
 
While money spent on university sports programs, childcare services, and student support and advocacy are freely available for law students, over $100,000 of law student funds allocated to the
Graduate Student Association (GSA) is not directly benefiting the law student population. (Disclosure: De Minimis receives funding from the GSA.)
 
The GSA provides a breakdown of their funds online at <http://www.gsa.unimelb.edu.au/council/Your_Services_and_Amenities_Fees_SSAF_-_How_GSA_spent_your_fees_in_2012.shtml>, but does not provide a detailed budget.
 
The Law Students’ Society (LSS) does not receive any funding under the SSAF, and would be eligible only for $2 per student even if they met the GSA’s funding obligations.
 
“The problem with the allocation seems [to be] that the University is giving primacy to making negotiations on the split as easy as possible, rather than ensuring the best outcome for student life”, LSS President Pat Easton said.
 
“Last year, Antony Freeman as LSS President approached the Provost regarding a reconsideration of their allocation agreement and we were rebuffed,” Easton continued. “The university made it fairly clear they weren’t interested in hearing from the LSS.”
 
Andrew Frawley, who is leading the LSS campaign for a reallocation of the funding, stressed that this was not just about the LSS getting more money.
 
“We understand that the LSS doesn’t have sole claim as a representative organisation in the law school, but we feel that each of those organisations – LSS, GLSA, MLMSA, MCLS, MJIL, MULR – would do a better job of representing the interests of law students than the GSA,” Frawley said.
 
He pointed out that more funding from the SSAF fund would enable these groups to provide services that were not as tied to the sponsorship obligations of commercial law firms.
 
GSA councillor Michael Robson, who is also a third-year JD, responded to these concerns, stating that “faculty bodies provide social and complementary educational services, supported by the GSA and UMSU. The broader services these organisations offer require considerable resources, including staff and expertise, that faculty bodies cannot provide.”
 
“The GSA is a body that represents all graduate students, not just those from a particular faculty,” Robson added. “We represent student interests on university committees and boards and provide expert advocacy services [and provide] funding and support for student clubs and societies.”
 
The university’s academic registrar Neil Robinson has asked students to submit feedback on the allocation of the funds collected through the SSAF. The SSAF legislation may be repealed by a Coalition government, and the university reportedly wants to know which services to prioritise.
 
Nicholas Baum