 |
Peter has practised extensively in a wide range of civil litigation, at interlocutory, trial and appellate levels. He is frequently briefed in relation to tort (predominantly professional negligence) contract (largely building and construction) and administrative law (especially professional discipline) matters, but also has considerable experience in equity, trade practices and appellate work generally.
He is particularly interested in litigation which attempts to apply or adapt established legal principle to new circumstances, or in an unconventional way. For instance, whilst still a junior, Peter was lead counsel for the home owner in Bryan v Maloney (1995) 182 CLR 609, in which the High Court established tortious liability of home builders to subsequent purchasers. More recently he was:-
one of the counsel who appeared for Senator Bob Brown in the landmark Federal Court decision of Brown v Forestry Tasmania [2006] FCA 1729, which resulted in an injunction restraining all logging in approximately 50 km² of state forest, on the basis that it threatened endangered species;
counsel for a convicted child murderer in ABC v O’Neill (2006) 229 ALR 457, where the High Court discharged an interlocutory injunction restraining the ABC from airing allegations that the prisoner was suspected of murdering the Beaumont children, on grounds of freedom of speech;
counsel for a liquidator in proceedings in which the Federal Court approved his claim to recover his costs of responding to an ASIC investigation into his conduct, on the basis that they formed part of the costs of the liquidation: see ASIC v Piggott Wood & Baker [2006] FCA 1774;
counsel for the applicant in the novel case of re an Application by the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre Inc. [2007] TASSC 5, where the Supreme Court granted letters of administration over the estates of 17 long deceased Tasmanian Aboriginals whose remains were held by the Natural History Museum in London.
Presently Peter is exploring the boundaries of the Lange doctrine in two pioneering cases: firstly he is acting for a number of individuals in litigation in which they are seeking to extend the defence to trespass committed during the course of a political protest, and secondly he is acting against the publisher of several election advertisements, who is asserting that the vilification of transgender persons falls within the implied constitutional freedom.
Details of the various reported cases in which Peter has appeared as counsel can be found at
Victorian Bar
Outside of the law, Peter’s interests include farming (especially rare livestock breeds), post-war British cars, and fishing.
Although principally based in Hobart, Peter maintains chambers in Melbourne, and is generally available to confer or appear in Victoria or elsewhere.
|
