A SENIOR Newcastle Anglican lawyer with “the ear of three bishops” was challenged over his honesty at the royal commission after evidence he told the diocese in 2015 that a child sex victim’s claim would be “small and resolved with a few letters” after talks with the victim’s solicitor, his “good friend”.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Keith Allen allegedly told Anglican diocese business manager John Cleary that the claim “will be easy”, Mr Cleary’s file note of his 2015 meeting with Mr Allen said.
“Allen advised that he is assisting (solicitor) Michael Daley with this claim. I found this strange that Allen was assisting a victim of abuse to sue the diocese when Allen is a board member of the diocese,” Mr Cleary’s note said.
The file note led to bruising questioning of Mr Allen by royal commission chair Justice Peter McClellan on Friday after Mr Allen denied acting for the diocese, or having a conflict of interest.
“Do you see the conflict now? Here you are in discussions with Mr Daley, he acting in pursuit of the claim and you advising the diocese it will be a small one. You should never have been in that position,” he said.
Justice McClellan put to Mr Allen that “it wouldn’t be honest of a solicitor to act in that way, would it?”, to assist in a claim while acting for the diocese.
“No, one can’t act for both parties,” Mr Allen said.
Justice McClellan replied: “Beyond being unprofessional it would just be dishonest, wouldn’t it?”
Mr Allen replied: “Yes.”
Mr Allen agreed he had “the ears” of Newcastle bishops Holland, Herft and Farran.
Mr Allen has been a member of the diocesan synod for 44 years, was a trustee for 25 years, was on the diocesan council and chairman of Synod committees for a number of years.
He represented Wyong Anglican priest Stephen Gray after he was charged with child sex offences against a boy in 1990. Mr Allen denied acting for the diocese apart from minor matters or giving advice.
He later conceded he had given advice after Justice McClellan questioned him about details of Mr Cleary’s file note.
“In the course of that meeting as this minute records, you gave advice?” Justice McClellan asked.
“There were discussions which may have been interpreted as advice, yes,” Mr Allen said.
“Well that’s a very oblique way of talking. Mr Allen. Can’t we just be frank. Were you not giving your opinion on various matters?” Justice McClellan said.
“Yes,” Mr Allen said.
The royal commission continues on Monday.
