O’Neill and Pray Solicitors
Phone: 07 3333 7777
340 Queens Street Fax: 02 3333 8888
BRISBANE QLD 4000
Our ref: CB/2011
15 September 2011
26 Cheaters Lane
Cheapside Qld 4009
Dear Ms Barr
Re: Disclosure of academic dishonesty in admission documents.
We refer to our recent discussion where you sought advice as to whether you need to disclose an
incident of minor academic dishonesty in documents filed with the Supreme Court seeking your
admission as a solicitor. We understand that you have met all the other requirements for admission,
having completed a Bachelor of Laws and a Graduate Diploma in Legal Practice at QUT.
[INSERT YOUR ADVICE HERE]
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Mr/Ms Student on the number or e-mail
address above. We look forward to receiving your instructions.
O‘Neill and Pray Solicitors EXAMPLE:FALCON,CORBINANDFINCH 340 Queens Street
LAWYERS BRISBANE QLD 4000
Tel: (07) 3333 3333
Our ref: JS: 29/08
5 July, 2013
Ms Cordelia Dottsom
4 Shirley Street
ASHGROVE QLD 4051
Dear Ms Dottsom,
Re: Your rights against Pets Rule
1. YOUR INSTRUCTIONS
We refer to our recent meeting where you outlined your concerns about the use and display of your photographs by
Pets Rule. You took a series of photographs of dogs with your name in print and sold them to Pets Rule. They
distorted the photographs without your permission to depict dogs in bikinis and other similar attire, but the distorted
photographs still carried your name. You are worried about the damage to your business reputation after three clients
cancelled photo shots. You seek advice on your rights against Pets Rule. In particular, you hope to stop the sale of the
mugs carrying the distorted photographs and you seek compensation.
2. WHAT RIGHTS DO YOU HAVE AGAINST PETS RULE?
The Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) outlines rights, known as 'moral rights', to protect the work of people such as
yourself. The two rights relevant to your situation are noted below.
2.1 Your right not to have your work falsely associated
The Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) explains you have a right not to have the distorted photographs falsely associated
with your name. Pets Rule has infringed this right by substantially distorting your photographs and leaving
your name affixed to the altered images. Pets Rule displayed your photographs in such a way as to suggest it
was your unaltered work.
2.2 Your right not to have your photographs altered
The Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) also explains you have a right not to have your photographs distorted, mutilated,
or modified in such a way that is hurtful to your reputation. Pets Rule's act of distorting your photographs to
depict dogs in bikinis and other similar attire was arguably treatment that was hurtful to your reputation. The
fact that three clients cancelled photo shots after seeing the altered photographs helps establish an infringement
of this right.
3. ARE THERE ANY LEGAL EXCUSES AVAILABLE TO PETS RULE? It seems that there are no legal defences available to Pets Rule for infringing the two rights outlined above. The
fact that you sold the photographs to Pets Rule does not affect your rights. However, we need to confirm if
there was a written contract between you and Pets Rule, and if so, that it does not contain permission for
Pets Rule to alter your photographs. Pets Rule may escape legal liability if there was written permission.
4. WHAT ARE YOU ENTITLED TO?
You may be able to seek a court order to stop the sale of the mugs and compensation for the damage to your
reputation. The amount of compensation would likely reflect the value of your lost clientele and your lost opportunity
for publicity or self-marketing. It may also be possible to seek a public apology by Pets Rule. A court will look
closelyat any attempts to negotiate a settlement before issuingan order to stop the sale of the mugs.
5. WHAT ARE YOUR OPTIONS?
You have two broad options available. The first option is to instigate court proceedings immediately against Pets
Rule. The second option is to attempt negotiation and settlement before resorting to court action. You have a very
strong chance of success in an action against Pets Rule for infringing the two rights, provided you did not give
written permission in a contract. The second option offers the best chance of stopping the sale of the mugs because it
shows the court you have attempted to negotiate.
6. OUR RECOMMENDATION
We recommend the negotiation and settlement option in the followingsteps:
a) Step one - Negotiate a settlement with Pets Rule. A formal letter should be written to Pets Rule on your
behalf outlining their infringements of your rights and a request to negotiate a settlement. This approach
serves two objectives:
Firstly, it allows you to avoid the cost, stress and burden of a court action; and
Secondly, if a court action eventuates, it will demonstrate to the court that you have made a
reasonable attempt to resolve the problem.
b) Step two - Instigate court proceedings if negotiation fails.
7. WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
If you would like our office to proceed with one of the options above please:
Contact our office and confirm your instructions;
Send to our office a copy of the written contract if one exists; and
Send to our office a copy of the original photographs if available.
We will then coordinate a meeting with you to discuss the option in detail. If you have any questions, please
do not hesitate to contact Mr John Smith on the number or e-mail address above. We look forward to receiving
Mr Senior Partner
Falcon, Corbin and Finch FACTS TO MENTION ABOUT PLAGIARISM FOR ESSAY/LETTER
Legal Profession act 2007 governs admission
A person is eligible if
o (a) 18 yrs and older
o (b) Qualified
o (c) approved training requirements
Suitability: s 31
(1) eligible only if fit and proper person
(2) In deciding ―fit and proper‖ SC must consider
o (a) Suitability matters
o (b) other matters SC considers relevant
(3) SC may deem a person proper, despite a suitability matter.
Suitability defined: s 9
(1) Each of the following is a suitability matter
o (a) Whether the person is currently of good fame and character;
o (b) Whether the person is or has been an insolvent under administration;
o (c) Whether the person has been convicted of an offence in Australia or a foreign
country, and if so—
i. The nature of the offence; and
ii. How long ago the offence was committed; and
iii. The person‘s age when the offence was committed
Why this matter:
Academic misconduct is a matter that determines whether a person is of good fame and
character: s 9, and thus a fit and pr