What did Andrew Bell SC (as he then was) do, that no other barrister had done to Gummow J in 17 years?
<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Bell_(judge)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Andrew Bell SC</a> got appointed to the Supreme Court of NSW, then NSW Court of Appeal from 28 Feb 2019 -, and now Chief Justice of NSW. He was Vinerian Scholar on the BCL, and got a DPhil.</p>
<p>Scroll down half way on <a href="https://justinian.com.au/archive/off-with-the-rent.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://justinian.com.au/archive/off-with-the-rent.html</a>, which cites <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/HCATrans/2011/294.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Hellicar &amp; Ors; Shafron v Australian Securities and Investments Commission</em> [2011] HCATrans 294 (26 October 2011).</a></p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Bell:</strong> Well, your Honour, we do not know what the recollections were - - -</p>
<p><em><strong>Gummow:</strong></em> Just a minute, Mr Bell.</p>
<p><em><strong>French CJ:</strong></em> Just let Justice Gummow finish his question.</p>
<p><em><strong>Gummow:</strong></em> No, I am not going to finish the question.</p>
<p><em><strong>Bell:</strong></em> Sorry, I thought you had. We do not know what the recollections were but he was willing to discuss those with ASIC. He was not willing to discuss those with us. The fact that he did not have or may have had few recollections would be – may itself be significant if the court were to find that one would expect him to have recollections. This was a pretty major matter of public interest and public importance.</p>
<p><strong>Gummow:</strong> You managed to do something, Mr Bell, which no other counsel has done to me in 17 years on this court, but I will not say any more and I do not think it is funny.</p>
<p><strong>Bell:</strong> I do not know what your Honour is referring to, sir - I am just trying genuinely to answer your Honour’s questions. Now, the point is, there was a witness who ASIC should have, as a public interest body, no interest in securing findings of contravention and disqualifications on the basis of an imperfect record, no interest, whatsoever, and really - - -</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Don't you just love the occasional weird judicial brain snap?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The issue actually arose a few lines earlier in the transcript:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Gummow:</strong> He also seems to have said that he had 'few recollections' and did not recall - et cetera, the February meeting. So why do we assume that there was this - - -</p>
<p><strong>Bell:</strong> Well, your Honour, we do not know what the recollections were - - -</p>
<p><strong>Gummow:</strong> Just a minute, Mr Bell.</p>
<p><strong>French CJ:</strong> Just let Justice Gummow finish his question.</p>
<p><strong>Gummow:</strong> No, I am not going to finish the question.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Bell merely interrupted Justice Gummow. This is a serious breach of etiquette in an oral argument.</p>

australia