Mr Witt Case Summary

A Supreme Court judge wants authorities to investigate a Melbourne family of "crooks" involved in a bitter dispute over properties in the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Germany worth more than $30 million.

Justice Jack Forrest also ordered Melbourne lawyer Michael Witt, a partner at Findlay Arthur Phillips, pay a $25,000 fine for contempt of court over his dealings with Jan Talacko and Mr Talako's sons, David and Paul.

The properties in dispute included historic buildings in Prague and Dresden, rural land, forests and apartments belonging to Jan Talacko's parents, Alois and Helena, which were seized after 1948 by communist governments in Czechoslovakia and East Germany.

Melbourne lawyer Michael Witt.
Melbourne lawyer Michael Witt. Justice …show more content…
"I have no doubt that the true explanation for Mr Witt's behaviour is that he was far too close to his client and his client's family.

"He was prepared, to the point of now sacrificing his professional reputation, to give advice which was inconsistent with his obligations as an officer of the Court."

Justice Forrest said he was satisfied Mr Witt was remorseful and regretted his actions.

The judge said he was conscious that given Mr Witt had admitted the civil contempt of court charge, his career as a barrister was in jeopardy and he could be charged by the Legal Services Commissioner with a serious ethical offence.

In regards to the Talackos, the judge said there was "a significant body of evidence which supports a prime facie case that there have been significant breaches of the criminal law by members of Jan Talacko's family and, perhaps, their associates and agents".

He said it did not matter that David and Paul Talacko and their mother Judith were living overseas, "the conduct of all involved needs to be scrutinised by the prosecuting authority (the Director of Public

Show More

Related Documents: Mr Witt Case Summary

Compression: Deep Vein Thrombosis and Prophylaxis Essay