In a more general sense, the satisfaction of practising law arises from being able to help people at a time that is difficult for them.
Angela is retired after a varied working career, first in computer systems, then in management consulting, then as a commercial solicitor and finally as a criminal barrister.
As a teenager, Angela recognised that she was happiest whilst on a learning curve and decided to change jobs about every decade. She has sat on a number of governing boards including the Royal Children’s Hospital, Family Planning Victoria, Phillip Institute of Technology, Ardoch Youth Foundation, Australian Centre at the University of Melbourne, Commercial Law Association – Victorian Branch.
It is always interesting to know what aspect motivates our members to join U3APP?
I became a member in 2003 when U3A began in Albert Park, as I lived in Middle Park and enjoy being an active member of my community. I joined the Bridge Club and the choir at that time.
Where did you spend your childhood years?
I was brought up in Inverell in NSW, about 100 kilometres south of the Queensland border on the inland foothills of the Great Divide. Inverell is a beautiful town on the McIntyre River.
My father was a General Practitioner there – a wise and accomplished man. I was the fifth of five daughters. My 2 eldest sisters were at boarding school when I was born and the other 2 followed soon after.
I spent years at home without my sisters being there, and would often accompany my father on house calls, both in the town and for distances of many miles into the surrounding districts. In those days your general practitioner really “knew you”. He knew the conditions of your life, where and how you lived and who lived with you.
What motivated you to pursue a career in law?
I did not begin my law degree until I was 35. My first degree is in Economics (Sydney University), majoring in Economic Statistics. After graduating, I worked on the first commercial computer installation in Australia at BHP’s Newcastle Steelworks, the first woman programmer/systems analyst in the computer department.
This turned out to be an interesting process, as the job was advertised at the University Appointments Board as Men Only Need Apply. It was 1963, 20 years before the first anti-discrimination legislation.
The recruiters refused to interview me and on their return to Newcastle apparently reported my attempts to be interviewed as a joke. The Manager of the Computer Department asked where he could find me and came to the Women’s College and interviewed and employed me. He used my first initial and my surname only.
I started work at the beginning of January 1964. After some months I was sent out to the plant to do some systems enquiries in the Cold Rolling Mill. I did all the right things – wore a safety helmet, overalls, boots and checked in at the safety desk.
When I walked onto the floor of the mill, the workers (all male) wolf whistled over the loudspeaker system. I was 20 years old and was astonished by this reception. I returned to the office having obtained the information I required. When I came to work the next morning, I found that the entire steelworks was “down”, not operating. The open hearth furnaces that were used then to make steel, took weeks to get up to heat, so this was a serious interruption to steel production. All the unions represented at the steelworks were on strike because “a woman had been on the plant”. Apparently, this was a first.
How did you respond to that? I became a committed feminist. At the time it was expected that the managing director would sack me. I waited, but this did not happen. So, I stayed on and left at the time of my choice towards the end of 1964.
Did you find out why you were not dismissed? Many years later, living in Melbourne, I attended a dinner function. By chance I was seated next to that managing director, so I asked him about it. He responded that he had received a phone call from the Women Graduates Association, who threatened action if he sacked me. So, he didn’t! It took another 20 years until the Sex Discrimination Act (1984) became law.
At the end of 1964 I left for England where after some months of travelling in Europe, I obtained employment in London with IBM as a programmer and systems analyst, and ultimately met and married a fellow employee, an American. We lived and worked in London until 1968 when we moved to the USA; first to Boston for two years and then to New York for another two years.
In 1972, with two small children, we came to live in Melbourne. Over the next 6 years, I completed a post-graduate Fellowship in Management at RMIT (first woman graduate in that course) and lectured in aspects of computing and management at the Footscray Institute of Technology, the Chisholm Institute of Technology and the Swinburne College of Technology.
Then between 1978 and 1981, I completed an Honours Degree in Law at Monash University. I was then an articled clerk at Corr and Corr (now Corrs Chambers Westgarth), an employed solicitor and finally a partner of that firm. My practice at Corrs covered tax law, defamation, broadcasting and media law, takeovers and general litigation.
Has the law, in respect to the media and the press, changed over the years? Has the media more freedom or is it more restricted these days?
There are probably more defamation cases issued but I don’t think that many more end up in actual litigation in Court. Defamation in our modern world of instant communication does not provide an effective remedy, as the only remedy it offers at the end of the day is an amount of damages; but by the time those are awarded, probably years after the actual publication of the defamation, the reputational damage has been established. No amount of monetary award will change that. Typically, defamation lawyers focus their efforts on settling claims swiftly, most often with a published apology and some cost compensation.
Ownership of media outlets is no longer regulated in the way it once was and thus concentration of ownership has flourished. This has resulted in a severe restriction of choice for the consumer.
You practised Criminal Law, what was this experience like for you personally? After Corrs, I went to the Bar in order to practise Criminal Law for the defence. This was a total change in my professional life. I read with Brian Bourke, an established and renowned defence barrister, and spent my 10 years at the Bar sharing Chambers with him. He had an enormous influence on my attitudes. Particularly I adopted his view of imprisonment, which he regarded as an ineffective and expensive punishment for the large majority of offenders, often producing further criminality.
Can you expand on this? One of the most gratifying aspects of being a defence lawyer is that in order to mount your case, you learn the relevant details of your client’s life – which may involve their childhood, their disadvantages, hardships, family issues, the pressures in their lives; their prejudices and how those developed. In many cases it is the disadvantage experienced in the client’s life that has led directly to the breach of the law. Locking people up does not address the root causes of criminality.
In this respect, what are your thoughts on Indigenous incarceration in Australia?
I think the statistics speak for themselves. Indigenous children are imprisoned at 26.6 times the rate of non-Indigenous children. This over-representation is a persistent issue, with Indigenous youth comprising only 5.7% of the 10-17 age group in Australia but making up 63% of those in detention. As for adults, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adult prisoners account for 36% of all prisoners. Specifically, the imprisonment rate for First Nations adults is 14 times the rate for non-Indigenous adults. An appalling situation of which, as a fifth generation Australian citizen, descended from a First Fleet free settler, I am thoroughly ashamed.
A quote by the poet Judith Wright from a letter to Nugget Coombs: “We (meaning non-Indigenous Australians) will never forgive them for what we did to them.” This is what makes change so elusive.
You have been on an impressive number of Boards of Management; can you pick out some highlights for you?
The greatest highlight, a real addition to my life, grew out of my membership of the Board of the Ardoch Youth Foundation. I met an 18 year old there who had been homeless for six years, living on the streets, because she was abandoned at 12 by her parents. I have maintained a relationship with her for over 30 years and with her daughter born 28 years ago. It has been a privilege to assist them over that period in a variety of ways, but I have gained so much more from them than I have offered them. My privilege has protected me from many aspects of life that they have had to face and overcome.
What aspect of your dedication to law over many years has given you the most satisfaction? I am very glad I pursued law. Being involved in the law introduces you to other people’s lives in a way that you would not experience in many other walks of life. This is especially so in Criminal Law. The clients are often at a very low point in their lives when you meet them and they rely on you to assist them. To do that effectively you have to know a lot of details about them, and they have to trust you. This does not include deciding whether they are guilty or not – that is not your job, that is up to the judge and the jury. In a more general sense, the satisfaction of practising law arises from being able to help people at a time that is difficult for them.
Which groups are you currently attending at U3APP? Just a couple at the moment: Multicultural Dance – Hoppa Hey with Sheffie Shapira, Marie Feigl and Naomi Gordon; Films with David Robinson. I attend lectures regularly either in person or by zoom, especially those dealing with old age challenges. In the past I have sung in the choir and played in the bridge group for many years.
Further reflections? I think old age is an enormous challenge. As Leo Tolstoy wrote: “Old age is the greatest surprise a human life will ever get.” I agree. First, coming to terms with how irrelevant you are now, out of the workforce, no influence on the world around you. I have always had challenging and fulfilling roles in my life.
U3A is a great assistance with this problem – so many interesting courses and groups offered, year after year. Second, dealing with the physical, mental and emotional changes that ageing brings. I have travelled a great deal in the past and have no plans to leave Australia again.
My goal at present is to finish transcribing Brian Bourke’s diaries. There were 60 of them from 1959 to 2018 when he died. They are handwritten in the worst handwriting known to man, a page for each day, a mixture of daily activities, observations and reflections. Brian (known universally as Bourkey) left his entire archive to the State Library and on his deathbed asked me to make the diaries, which are central to the entire archive, accessible.
The only way to do this is to transcribe them. I am 2/3rds of the way through that job after 7½ years of regular work. I estimate there are about 2½ million words. It is a very slow and meticulous job, but I love it. He was a man of many interests and lots of influence in various fields – the law, football, debating. The project gives purpose and momentum to my old age.
Interaction with my children and grandchildren and their support, underpins my life. They are all intelligent, involved and productive and of perpetual interest to me. I regard my relationship with them as by far the most important aspect of my life, way ahead of any career achievements and my time spent with them, is my most prized investment.
In conclusion, what do you think makes a good barrister? In respect to criminal law, in my view a good barrister is an active humanitarian. Also, it needs an analytic mind, an ability to process the evidence with a clear calm approach.
In contrast to the European system of law where judges can inform themselves using any sources they please in Australia, applying the Common Law, the judge and the jury are confined to the evidence presented in the courtroom to make their decisions. The barrister’s role in collecting all the relevant and admissible evidence and presenting it with clarity, is critical to justice.
Felicity May interviewed Angela Nordlinger