Any reference to CASACIR or its directors, shareholders, owners or operators relates to pre-14 February 2024 when the company was sold. In no way can anything said relate to the company or its new owners, operators, directors, and shareholders after that sale.
I contend that Kaye breached the ethics and the law guiding a barrister’s conduct. Not only did she do so, but from the evidence contained in the bills of costs, she also actively colluded, collaborated and conspired with her clients (including CASACIR Pty Ltd (“CASACIR”)) and the other members of the team to pervert the course of justice – and this is amply evidenced below in the summary of her bills for fees (for which she was amply paid).
As seen from Kaye’s conduct, she actively and/or passively assisted her clients, as well as the other members of the legal team: Ken Smith & Associates (“KSA”), Ken Smith (“Smith”) and Anthony Southall (Southall”) to be dishonest.
Kaye actively supported misleading and deceiving conduct when she prepared documents used by Southall and upon which she gave advice, that:
- made a considerable number of significantly derogatory and totally unwarranted statements which vilified, insulted and injured me;
- falsely implied that I had been fraudulent;
- falsely made accusations that I had been guilty of misconduct, and
- falsely attempted to discredit me before the court and his Honour.
I consider that Kaye’s collaboration and agreement with this behaviour contributed to it being scandalous, belittling and abusive, and arguably made her as culpable as Southall.
Kaye examined and re-examined witnesses on day 4 of the trial. During that time she actively encouraged hearsay – I contend that Kaye encouraged the falsity of the hearsay given that none of the people who “knew about it”, “know about it”, or “have seen it” were brought in as witnesses or provided affidavits to the effect of the truth of the testimony given about them and what they purportedly said.
In relation to the trial, Kaye specifically and deliberately delayed in finalising the statement of claim and in the particularising of the words claimed to be offensive – this deliberate and nasty delay was used against me and was a large part of the foundation that won Kaye’s clients many hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages, interest and costs.
In relation to the 2013 appeals, even though on maternity leave, on 10/4/14 she assisted Southall and Spencer in amending the summary regarding my proposed amendments, liaised with Smith, Southall and Spencer re the same; and provided further documents to assist them. It is unlikely that she was not paid for her time, estimated to be half a day based on the entries in Spencer’s bill.
In relation to the trial, the following are activities performed by Kaye according to the bill of costs dated March 2017, detailing her work:
- In September 2011:
- 2/9/2011 – she was in conferences with Southall; held conferences with her clients and Smith; and researched and prepared memorandum to Smith;
- 6/9/2011 – she prepared the draft for the first statement of claim;
- 7/9/2011 – she reviewed the website materials received from he clients and/or Jack Kraan (“Kraan”) and prepared the draft of the first statement of claim;
- 8/9/2011 – she reviewed the memorandum and prepared the draft of the first statement of claim;
- 27/9/2011 – she was in conference with Southall re draft for the first statement of claim;
- 28/9/2011 – she was in conference with Southall re draft for the first statement of claim; and she reviewed materials for imputations in draft for the first statement of claim;
- 29/9/2011 – she was in conference with Southall re draft for the first statement of claim; and prepared the memorandum to accompany draft for the first statement of claim;
- 30/9/2011 – she reviewed the draft statement of claim and accompanying memorandum; and was in discussions with Southall re draft for the first statement of claim and memorandum;
- In October 2011:
- 6/10/2011 – she updated the first statement of claim; and was in conference with Southall re the first statement of claim;
- 7/10/2011 – she was in conference with Southall re statement of claim; prepared the memorandum to instructors; and further updated the statement of claim;
- 11/10/2011 – she reviewed new updates on my previous website and updated statement of claim accordingly;
- 12/10/2011 – she updated the statement of claim; and collated and organised tags on website material in preparation for conference with her clients;
- 14/10/2011 – she was in conference with Southall in preparation for conference with her clients and further amendments to statement of claim; and had conference with her clients, Smith and Southall;
- In November 2011:
- 3/11/2011 – she had a telephone call with Kraan; reviewed new updates on my website; updated statement of claim in light of discussion with Kraan and website updates; and prepared email to Southall;
- 9/11/2011 – she had conference with Southall re changes to statement of claim; updated statement of claim; and prepared memorandum to Smith;
- 23/11/2011 – she had a telephone call with Kraan; and updated statement of claim in in accordance with further instructions;
- 24/11/2011 – she had a conference with Southall re updated statement of claim; and prepared memorandum to Smith;
- In January 2012:
- 30/1/2012 – she prepared draft orders for directions hearing; had a telephone call with Smith; and emailed to Smith;
- In February 2012:
- 1/2/2012 – she had a telephone call with Kerri Judd (“Judd”) (my senior counsel) re the statement of claim
- 2/2/2012 – she had a conference with Southall re Judd’s strike out points; prepared letter to my solicitor; and had telephone calls with her clients and Smith re additional work to be done;
- 7/2/2012 – she reviewed website printouts and highlighting and marking up with corresponding references to the statement of claim; prepared cover letter to go with folder of documents; and had a conference with Southall re folder of documents;
- 14/2/2012 – she had a conference with Southall re amending statement of claim; and amended statement of claim (the new statement of claim still contained the significant number of fraudulent misrepresentations, claims and denials as the previous, and added more);
- 15/2/2012 – she emailed to Smith with directions and letter;
- 23/2/2012 – she had a telephone call with Judd, Southall and Smith re directions hearing; prepared orders for directions by consent; and researched into matters raised by Judd re statement of claim;
- 24/2/2012 – she further research into matters raised by Judd re statement of claim;
- 27/2/2012 – she held a conference with Southall re amendments to the statement of claim; and amended statement of claim;
- 28/2/2012 – she researched into “downloading” and publication for the purposes of pleading in defamation law;
- 29/2/2012 – she prepared summaries of previous conferences; held a conference with Southall; held a conference with Southall, Smith and her clients; and updated statement of claim in light of matters raised in conference;
- In March 2012:
- 1/3/2012 – she had telephone calls with Smith; and reviewed letter;
- 2/3/2012 – she updated statement of claim in light of instructions received from her clients; and reviewed January / February website printouts (this further amended statement of claim contained the same significant number of fraudulent misrepresentations, claims and denials – but now included additional fraudulent misrepresentations (inter alia): that conversations had taken place that had not taken place and that they had taken place in locations they had not taken place; that I had stopped them blasting on a day and at a time when blasting was ready even though there were 5 people still on the benches and machinery operating in the vicinity (therefore I saved those peoples’ lives); and that my website had stopped Kaye’s clients from obtaining a permit that they had actually obtained 6 weeks prior to her making this false claim);
- 29/3/2012 – she reviewed my Defence; and prepared email to Southall re the Defence;
- In April 2012:
- 12/4/2012 – she prepared the request for further and better particulars of the Defence and memorandum re same; and held a conference with Southall re request;
- 21/4/2012 – she reviewed request by my solicitors for further and better particulars of the statement of claim; and prepared response;
- 23/4/2012 – she prepared memorandum to Smith re further instructions required on request for further and better particulars;
- In May 2012:
- 17/5/12 – she held a conference with her clients re further and better particulars;
- 19/5/2012 – she updated response to request for further and better particulars in light of additional documents from G Peake’s files and Kraan email; and prepared letter to Smith;
- 21/5/2012 – she amended response to request for further and better particulars in light of instructions from Kraan; and discussed with Southall re further and better particulars;
- 22/5/2012 – she had a telephone call with Smith; and prepared response to request for further and better particulars and emailed to Southall;
- 23/5/2012 – she had a conference with Southall re response to request for further and better particulars;
- 24/5/2012 – she finalised response to request for further and better particulars (containing a significant number of fraudulent misrepresentations, claims and denials, including confirming and elaborating on the false claims as to conversations and meetings, and the fraudulent claims that, as a result of the website, her clients’ multi-million-dollar company was almost worthless, and that their property with known resources of around $165m was also basically worthless);
- In July 2012:
- 24 and 25/7/2012 – she emailed to instructor re mediation dates;
- In August 2012:
- 3/8/12 – she prepared letter to my lawyers re mediation;
- 12/8/2012 – she prepared affidavit for directions hearing and emailed to instructor;
- 15/8/2012 – she prepared consent orders for directions hearing and emailed to instructor;
- In November 2012:
- 1/11/2012 – she prepared the Mediation Position Paper (containing many erroneous misrepresentations, claims and denials);
- 7/11/2012 – she had telephone calls from mediator; and emailed to instructor;
- 8/11/2012 – she had telephone calls with Southall and instructor; and updated Mediation Position Paper;
- 9/1/2012 – she had a conference with Southall;
- 12/11/2012 – she prepared for the Mediation;
- 13/11/2012 – she appeared at the Mediation;
- 14/11/2012 – she prepared memorandum to Smith; drafted Calderbank letter; and prepared directions for directions hearing;
- 16/11/2012 – she amended memorandum to Smith; prepared further amended statement of claim; and amended orders;
- 20/11/2012 – Prepared letter to my lawyers; Amended memorandum; she had telephone call with Smith;
- 21/11/2012 – she prepared final version of memorandum and amended draft Calderbank letter;
- 22/11/12 – she had telephone calls with Judd re directions hearing; she had a conference with Southall re directions hearing; and prepared aide memoire to Southall re conversation with Judd;
- 23/11/2012 – she appeared at contested directions hearing; prepared a letter to the Court; amended statement of claim (still retaining many erroneous misrepresentations, claims and denials ); amended orders; and reviewed company searches received and prepared email to Southall re same;
- 29/11/12 – she reviewed my offer of compromise; had a conference with Southall re same; prepared memo re same; and had telephone call with Smith re same;
- 30/11/12 – she finalised memo re offer of compromise; and had telephone call with instructor;
- In December 2012:
- 3/12/12 – she had telephone calls with Smith;
- 4/12/2012 – she had a conference with Southall; made a telephone call to instructor; and prepared speaking notes for Southall for upcoming conference;
- 5/12/2012 – she had telephone calls with Smith; and researched into defamation cases re quantum of damages;
- 6/12/2012 – she had a conference with Southall; and reviewed and highlighted for Southall past memos;
- 7/12/2012 – she had a conference with Southall; prepared for conference with her clients; and had a conference with her clients and Smith;
- 10/12/2012 – she prepared memorandum; prepared notes from conference with her clients; and conferred with Southall re trial preparation;
- 17/12/2012 – she had a conference with Southall; amended memorandum and Calderbank letter and emailed same to Smith;
- 18/12/12 – she had a conference with Southall; conference with Southall and her clients; prepared further memorandum and updated Calderbank letter post conferences;
- 19/12/12 – she updated memo and Calderbank letter and discussion with Southall re same;
- In January 2013:
- 14/1/2013 – she responded to her clients email re topics for witnesses; had a telephone call with and emailed to instructor; and responded to instructor emailed re discovery documents;
- 16/1/2013 – she settling Affidavit of Documents;
- 17/1/2013 – she reviewed records of public meetings to determine whether discoverable;
- In February 2013:
- 6/2/13 – she emailed to instructor re Defendants discovery default;
- 12/2/13 – she considered my discovered documents; emailed to instructor re same; had discussions with Southall; and had a telephone call with Kraan;
- 13/2/2013 – she had a telephone call with Smith; emailed to Smith re witnesses to follow up; conferred with Southall re witness and notice to admit; and commenced preparation of notice to admit;
- 17/2/2013 – she prepared notice to admit memo;
- 18/2/2013 – she further prepared notice to admit;
- 20/2/2013 – she emailed to and had telephone calls with Kraan and Southall; and amended notice to admit and memo;
- In March 2013:
- 6/3/13 – she emailed to and had telephone calls with instructor re conference with Her clients; and reviewed instructor’s note of meeting P McWhinney;
- 7/3/2013 – she reviewed affidavit of Smith and discussing same with Southall; and had a conference with A Dunn;
- 8/3/2013 – she prepared A Dunn’s proof of evidence; and reviewed my discovered documents and discussing same with Southall;
- 12/3/2013 – she responded to instructors emails re notice of trial and discovery;
- 13/3/2013 – she prepared agenda for conference;
- 14/3/2013 – she had a conference with Southall; a conference with her clients; prepared draft offer of compromise; and prepared letters responding to Defendant’s letters;
- 15/3/13 – she considered additional documents received from me and amended responses accordingly;
- 18/3/13 – she had a telephone conference with A Bignell; conferred with Southall re trial preparations; prepared A Bignell’s proof of evidence; and prepared letter responding to my correspondence;
- 20/3/13 – she had a conference with client; reviewed instructor’s emails and prepared court orders by consent; and reviewed my discovery and email to instructor re same;
- 21/3/2013 – she conferred with Southall re trial preparation; and prepared client’s proof of evidence;
- 22/3/2013 – she had a conference with client; and prepared a letter to me;
- 24/3/2013 – she prepared client’s proof of evidence; and prepared table analysing Google analytics;
- 27/3/2013 – she had telephone conferences with witnesses H Curnow (who was not a witness and did not give evidence), B McClure, P McWhinney; and had a telephone call with Kraan re evidence;
- 28/3/2013 – she prepared proofs of evidence for H Curnow (again, who was not a witness and did not give evidence – in fact he was called by refused to give evidence); B McClure, P McWhinney; had telephone calls with potential witness K Minehardt (who was not a witness and did not give evidence); prepared open submissions; had telephone conference with T Bailey (who was not a witness and did not give evidence) and prepared proof of evidence; and had a supplementary telephone conference with A Bignell;
- 30/3/2013 – she prepared summary of conference of 24 March 2013;
- In April 2013:
- 2/4/2013 – she prepared a list of documents for tender at trial and for copying emails to Smith re trial preparation; and prepared brief for trial;
- 3/4/2013 – she conferred with Southall; emailed to Smith re witnesses; had telephone call with Kraan; and prepared first draft of closing submissions;
- 4/4/2013 – she reviewed discovery; conferred with Southall; and prepared closing submissions (she prepared closing submissions prior to the trial commencing!);
- 5/4/2013 – she conferred with Southall and prepared documents for him;
- 6/4/2013 – she prepared for trial; marking up cases for Southall; and had telephone calls with instructor;
- 9/4/2013 – she generally prepared for trial; and had conference with clients;
- 10/4/2013 – she appeared at trial – day 1;
- 11/4/13 – she appeared at trial – day 2;
- 12/4/13 – she appeared at trial – day 3;
- 13/4/13 – she prepared notes for cross examination of me; and updated closing submissions (even having sat through the trial to this date, the submissions she prepared contained considerable erroneous misrepresentations, claims and denials, including continuing to make claims that had been proven to be false before Pagone J during the trial);
- 15/4/13 – she appeared at trial – day 4;
- 16/4/13 – she appeared at trial – day 5;
- 17/4/13 – she appeared at trial – day 6;
- 18/4/13 – she prepared memo to Smith;
- In May 2013:
- 23/5/13 – she had a conference with Her clients; and prepared for judgment; and appeared to take judgment.
For her conduct, including her erroneous conduct, Kaye was paid fees of $47,870.48.
In relation to my s29 application regarding the conduct of the Kaye, the other members of the legal team and their clients, the following are activities performed by Kaye, according to the bill of costs dated April 2017, detailing her work:
- In May 2013:
- 15/5/13 – she had telephone calls with Smith and her clients; and reviewed my application;
- 19/5/2013 – she reviewed section 29 summons, affidavit and submissions; and emailed to Southall re same;
- 22/5/2013 – she researched into overarching obligations for Southall; and had a telephone call with Smith;
- 28/5/2013 – she had a conference with Southall re section 29 summons; and prepared the draft Calderbank letter;
- 29/5/2013 – she had a conference with Southall re Calderbank letter; and had a telephone call with instructor;
- In June 2013:
- 1/6/2013 – she reviewed the second costs summons and affidavit filed by me;
- 4/6/2013 – she appeared at directions hearing before Daly AsJ;
- 5/6/2013 – she prepared a memo to Smith re the directions hearing;
- 21/6/13 – she reviewed further documents from me (further and better particulars); and conferred with Southall re same;
- 26/6/2013 – she prepared draft memo to Smith re section 29 application;
- In July 2013:
- 3/7/2013 – she had a conference with Southall re section 29 application and re draft memo; and had a telephone call with Smith;
- 5/7/2013 – she had a conference with Southall re summons;
- 8/7/2013 – she had a conference with Smith and her clients;
- 10/7/2013 – she reviewed my Calderbank letter and discussing same with Southall;
- 11/7/2013 – she prepared notes for directions hearing;
- 12/7/2013 – she conferred with and assisted Southall to prepare for directions hearing;
- 15/7/2013 – she appeared at directions hearing; prepared memo re directions hearing; and reviewed and responded to emails from instructor re installment orders;
- In September 2013:
- 24/9/2013 – she conferred with Southall re directions hearing;
- 26/9/2013 – she appeared at directions hearing before Daly AsJ.
For her conduct in this matter, including her appalling conduct, Kaye was paid fees of $6,818.75.
In relation to the appeals of the defamation case, the following are activities performed by Kaye, according to the bills of costs served October 2015, detailing her work:
- In April 2014:
- 10/4/14 – she liaised with Southall and Spencer re summary and my proposed amendments, and provided further documents to assist them.
It is unknown how much Kaye was additionally paid for this work.
Kaye chose to remain silent during some extraordinary conduct of, in particular, Southall – this is clearly because she not only agreed with it, she actively prepared much of it for Southall to present. She could have brought the truth to bear but made the decision to instigate and support the deplorable erroneous conduct rather than to try to stop it. She had the authority and the right as evidenced by Southall on one of the extremely few times she did correct him (T92:14-15):
my attention is drawn by my junior back to…
However, her further interruption was unlikely given that she had personally drafted the various documents Southall was speaking from.
Kaye had personally identified the words objected to, had tagged them back on 12 October 2011 and then colluded, collaborated and conspired with the others to deliberately delay filing, serving and particularising the words.
Kaye was a crucial part of the process and instigated and/or assisted in the production and presentation of the what could well be determined to be grossly erroneous evidence and information that contributed to Kaye’s clients being awarded $140,000 in damages, together with interest and costs (including on an indemnity basis), totalling many hundreds of thousands of dollars – and Kaye herself was herself grandly rewarded by being paid significant fees – at least $54,689.23 according to the bills – and by the recognition of having been part winning the case by her silence and collusion, collaboration and conspiracy.
The bills of costs clearly reveals Kaye’s collusion, collaboration and conspiracy with the others to perpetrate insult upon insult upon me and which misled and deceived the court, and to pervert the course of justice, and reveals that she had therefore significantly breached many of the Rules that govern her conduct.