<lawanddisordernov2011>

I admit that I am a good communicator but to label me a gossip is both hurtful and defamatory. I am a caring person and if I do pass on information it is for the good of the community, even if it turns out to be wrong. Alternatively, it is entertaining tittle tattle. Surely the law is not taking away the basic right of a chat between acquaintances, however distant?

The victims of gossip, understandably often turn out to have no sense of humour about it at all.

If you have gone too far a quick apology, given and accepted, is the best course of action for all parties. The alternative is to wait and see if the victim will sue you for defamation which can be a successful strategy depending on the seriousness of your defamatory statements. Lawyers and probably spouses can help even stubborn people to assess the stupidity of their statements.

You could claim “qualified privilege” in that you acted reasonably not recklessly in making the defamatory statements even if they turned out to be wrong. A court will consider if it was your duty to make the statement e.g. a member of your staff had a terrible secret, or it was in the public interest e.g. your mother in law is an axe murderer. The person you tell must have a need to know e.g. your mother in law’s next door neighbour probably does not need to know about your employee’s secret but may find it useful to know about your mother in law. You must act sensibly and check your source, if it is someone who is unreliable or is as big a gossip as you then it may be best not to pass it on especially if it will have serious consequences e.g. your mother in law’s arrest, detention and trial, even if she is eventually acquitted. You should consider confronting that employee as people often get the wrong end of the stick.

If you were being malicious then you lose this protection even if you were telling the truth. It can still be malice if it was not your intention to injure the victim. The question is did you misuse the information, did you have the right motive in telling?

If all else fails there may be a few gossips on the jury who would empathize with you and quickly decide that you are blameless, but I would not count on it.

Property lawyers are a little like your mother; they wish you to find a home and live happily ever after but delight in pointing out flaws in the one that you have chosen. They are cautious by nature.

One trainee lawyer acting for a purchaser conducted his searches against the office address of the vendor's lawyer. His principal commented that this approach was far too cautious.

During my articles in the UK, it was the usual residential conveyancing practice for the purchasers' lawyer to make written Pre-Contract Enquiries about the property to which the answer usually was "No, but the purchasers should rely on their own enquiries".

I didn't find it so funny either, but I have had to put up with quite a lot of this juvenile behaviour over the years, mostly from conveyancing lawyers.

Five people put their hand up to the first question and none to the second. A small survey but instructive.

There is only one reason left to go before I reach number 101 in my blog. Four years ago, I started the 101 Reasons to Kill all the Lawyers blog when a report was released concluding that judges enjoyed their work. Frankly, they could have fooled me. Now there is a study to suggest that lawyers in general are very happy with their job. However this was a UK study. Lawyers in the UK are known to be exceedingly happy whereas as you may be aware the rest of us can struggle.
I posted the next reason when I saw lawyers in suits bravely fighting riot police in the streets of Islamabad, Pakistan. They were prepared to risk injury defending the independence of judges, even if an Economist report	Like this cartoon? Click here to see mugs, golf shirts, gym bags, iphone covers, mouse pads, underwear and lots more for advocate in your life in The Barrister's Gift Shop
suggested that in another part of town, other Gucci clad lawyers cynically had photo ops in police vans.	Or click here to see over 25 on-line stores dedicated to various types of lawyers gifts

After that, one reason followed another, intermittently. I decided on 101 reasons as I didn’t want to depress the entire legal profession by having 1,001 reasons.

By 2009 I had a strong suspicion that it was all the judges fault , although, I felt that legal receptionists needed to bear some, if not most of the responsibility for the supposed unpopularity of the profession.

I became convinced that many legal issues could have been avoided if clients could be directed away from situations which have so often have adverse legal and social consequences, such as:

We lawyers are far more popular than we thought and it may be safe to encourage our own children to become lawyers, after all.

At 3.20 pm each Thursday on the Mary-Lou Stephens Show on ABC Radio call in to have your legal questions answered or at least considered briefly by legal eagle, Paul Brennan.

Disclaimer: The content of the Law & Disorder eZine is to give you legal basics and in some instances included unashamedly to try and make you laugh. In law it is sometimes difficult to work out what is serious and what is just for fun. Therefore, if you plan to do anything legal, rely on your own lawyer’s advice or instruct me to look at the particular facts of your case. Not only will I deny responsibility for the legal content but also for some of the jokes.