SW v UH LCRO 170/2014 (5 February 2016) [pdf, 48 KB]
...decision on 16 July 2014. [12] Mr SW submits that: (a) Ms UH had played a part in the preparation of Ms CR’s letter. (b) Ms UH should have required Ms CR to seek independent advice before providing correspondence to the Court. (c) Ms UH had permitted a serious defamation to be promulgated. (d) Ms UH has not sought to withdraw the affidavit, or redact the offending statements from the affidavit. (e) He had been required to file an affidavit in the Family Court as a consequenc...