Myself having vaguely watched tittle dated ABC 4 Corners program relating to a number of elderly people suing Christian Brothers for elderly people while being school children being sexually abuse, my listening to the 4 corners narrator I somewhat determined court judges were allowing the Christian Brothers case lawyers to continue defending Christian Brothers often using expensive barristers.
     Watching television’s fictional story courtroom murder trials, judges are often controlling proceedings judges making judgements on what’s relevant to trials to allow juries to correctly determine guilt.
     I’d suggest state governments whom pass laws whom have close relationships with members of the legal profession are allowing laws that allow court cases to go on forever, lawyers including barristers to financially gain from continued court cases. Christian Brothers may fear judgements in favour of complain-tents will begin a flood of more complain-tents, whom remain silent believing suing religious organisations similar to Christian Brothers, only results in many years of traumatising time consuming legal court cases.
     Governments themselves don’t want class action court cases against themselves for poor decision making uncontrollable events, so governments create the environment of being able to be sued yet making complaint-tent winning win-able cases very difficult, court cases go on forever.
     Reasons media don’t frequently report court cases against governments are that people wanting to sue a government are advised by lawyers not to, that courts are biased against people in favour of government outcomes, that if the right for compensation is worthy complain-tents will never win. One example RAAF airfield fire extinguishing toxic fluids not used in many countries because of known cancer warnings.
     The above reading is about how 4 corners fails to mention why judges are allowing years of court cases to continue.

steve9