Transcript
Hello and welcome back to the
Australian Law Student Podcast.
I'm your host Oliver Hammond and
in today's episode I had the
pleasure of speaking with Karen
Patch.
Karen is a highly accomplished
junior barrister with specialist
experience in insolvency and
corporations law.
Karen's journey through the
legal profession has been
nothing short of remarkable and
she has built a reputation for
her expertise and dedication to
her work.
During our conversation, Karen
shares her experiences
transitioning from a law student
to solicitor to a practising
barrister.
Her insights into the
complexities of the law and the
practical challenges she has
faced has made for a very
interesting discussion that you
don't want to miss.
So without further ado, sit
back, relax, and enjoy the
podcast.
Hello everyone, and welcome to
the Australian Law Student
Podcast.
I'm your host, Oliver Hammond,
and today I have a very special
guest with me, Karen Petch from
New Chambers, a junior
barrister.
Karen, thanks so much for
joining me today.
Thanks, I'm happy to join you.
I'll start off with my first
question.
You're recognised as a leading
expert in insolvency and
restructuring law.
Did you take an interest in this
field during law school or has
your expertise developed over
time through your work?
Many students and young lawyers
are keen to know how to choose a
specialisation in a field to
practice in the law and perhaps
the best way to pursue it.
Sure, the short answer is it
started at law school, but for a
long time I didn't know what I
wanted to do.
Like everybody, I went straight
from law school, straight from
school to law school rather, and
about three years into my law
degree thought I don't know if I
can keep doing this.
Like this is a really long thing
to do.
So I actually took a year out,
went to the UK, worked in events
management for the British
Museum of all things.
And when I came back I did
equity with then Professor John
Stumbles, who has sadly passed
away.
He was a really great expert in
equity, but he was also a
partner at Mallesons.
And so, OK, WM as it is now.
And So what he should sort of
showed me was that there was a
real commercial application to
principles of equity.
And that brought me sort of back
into the present.
I think my frustration with law
school as I'd felt like it was
so esoteric.
I never wanted to be a
constitutional lawyer.
So like, you know, the the idea
of running those big arguments
didn't appeal to me.
So that really brought it into
the practical for me.
At a similar time I did
corporations law with and he's
now at UCID professor Jason
Harris and he and the
combination of those two
subjects made me think actually
equitable remedies in the
corporate world is is quite an
interesting topic.
So from meeting Jason as he
taught me corporations law, he
then came to be my honest
supervisor and I did my thesis
in insolvency.
He said that, you know, that
might be something that I might
enjoy and he was right.
And so I did my honest thesis in
insolvent trading of all things
and, and I found it interesting.
And so then when I applied for
grad roles, I had some real
experience in something.
I had real experience in
insolvency.
And I think that was appealing
to some of the firms that I went
to apply for.
I ended up at Allen Ovary in
London doing a training contract
there and I did insolvency
there.
And that really sort of cemented
my interest because while I was
there, I did rotations in
derivatives and capital markets
products as well as insolvency.
And it was the time of Lehman's.
Yeah, yeah.
So a big part of the Lehman's
insolvency was how to treat
their derivatives in capital
markets products.
So that was sort of the little
journey that led me into
insolvency and.
So did you did?
You go straight from Australia
to the UK.
Yeah, I did.
So I finished my law degree.
I did six months of a grad
rotation at Mentors.
Sorry, Mentors.
I loved it there.
But I then got a role with
Justice McDougal, then of the
equity division of the Supreme
Court in the commercial list.
And so I worked as an associate
for His Honour for a year and
then well prior to that, when
I'd been in London working in
events, I had applied for a
training contract, you know, so
I went over.
And I suppose taking a step sort
of back in your professional
career as a, as a barrister now,
was that something that you
always saw yourself doing as
well?
Yeah, I mean, I'd always had an
interest in the bar back in high
school and university.
I was better at debating and
mooting than I was at sitting in
a room and writing an essay.
So I I always knew that life
would be easier for me if I
could be a specialist advocate.
And it just so happened that the
path to the bar, at least back
then, I'm not completely sure
it's the same now, but back then
it was sort of working a big
Australian law firm as a
graduate.
Do an associate ship, go to
Oxbridge, work in an
international firm, would come
to the bar and that used to be
sort of like quite a typical
route.
And it just so happened that
that suited what I was
interested in doing.
So I think I did have an
interest in the bar, but it just
was like, so interested in doing
those things.
I suppose your your time in
overseas London, do you think
that formed you well as well?
I, I do, I spent 5 1/2 years at
AO and I went, I did my masters
at Cambridge as well while I was
over there.
And I think it did, I think the,
the big English firms, I don't
really have any experience of
the US firms other than I went
on secondment to New York with
Ellen and Ovary.
But I think the big English
firms are good that they have
such a competitive intake
process.
Everybody around me was very
clever.
The work that they were doing
was exceptional, particularly
Ellen and Ovary is a leading
banking firm.
I was interested in banking and
insolvency.
So I was seeing all sort of the
best work in the market.
And I think as a junior,
something I tell juniors that I
work with now is working at
those big firms can feel soul
crushing at 2:00 in the morning
on the 5th day.
But what?
And and that's not to be taken
lightly.
That is awful.
But what it gives you is 1/6
sense about how to run a
transaction, how to run a case,
attention to detail, producing a
good work product.
And so the things that I had
drilled into me island very
early on when I was, you know,
tired and grumpy, and now things
that I just take as sort of a
second nature, Yeah.
So I'm really, really grateful
for that experience.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, I mean Eleanor every, I
suppose.
I've recently just merged with.
Shannon.
Shannon, so big American firm
there has come and that's quite
big news actually.
It's quite revolutionary.
Yeah, we've talked a little bit
about that.
So yeah.
Yeah.
So I think it's a really
exciting opportunity.
When I was in New York, I could
see that that ANO was really
looking to make big inroads into
the US and so obviously they
found the perfect partner to do.
That yeah, yeah, no, it's a yes.
It's definitely a big budget.
I'll move on now to my next
question.
Sure.
Karen.
Your legal journey began at UTS
where you received the batch of
laws and you took to then the UK
and then, as you mentioned,
Cambridge.
This path has LED you to being
recognised as one of Australia's
best junior barristers in the
area of commercial disputes.
Could you share some notable
anecdotes or memorable cases
that have shaped your career and
even influenced your approach to
the law?
Yeah, sure.
I think I'll start with the
approach to the law first.
Like I I think I've been doing
this.
I was admitted as a lawyer in
Australia in 2010.
So it's 14 years.
I know you can't tell, but I
think what I know now is that
the law is really the serve in
at least in commercial law,
forget criminal law, that's
someone else's specialty.
I can't speak to that.
But in the commercial or at
least law is really the servant
of commerce.
And what I mean by that is the
law creates, or at least tries
to create predictable legal
outcomes around which commercial
people can do deals and buy,
sell, have faith in the economic
framework that supports their
transactions and their
litigation.
And So what that means is that
you are the law.
I think, or at least my approach
to the law is trying to produce
the most predictable outcome
that that is available given the
context.
So in the transactional side,
that means parties coming
together.
So I did transactional law in
the UK before I did litigation
here.
In the transactional world, that
means putting together a set of
documents that reflects the
party's bargains and allowing
them, giving them advice about
the operation of the law so that
they can price their risk.
So it's inevitable sometimes
that conflict emerges, but
people want to be able to price
the risk of that conflict when
they're entering into their
transaction.
So you might, for example, buy
something really cheap if
there's a chance it'll go badly
and that's OK.
It's when those two things come
out of sync that you have
problems.
And so as a consequence of sort
of that being my understanding
of how the law and commerce work
together, I think that makes me
a little bit more commercial
when I come to settle cases.
So clients, for example, who
they always knew there was a
risk and they just want to get
out on a certain basis.
It makes it easier to sort of go
with the client and and form an
outcome for them that they want
based on their understanding of
the matter.
I think that's really important
because at the end of the day,
they're not our cases, they're
the clients cases and you're
dealing with people's lives,
fortunes, futures.
So it's really important to
remember that I think of course,
when insolvency comes in, nobody
anticipated that that would be
the result and that can often
turn things on its head.
So I think again, in that
circumstance, trying to do the
same thing, trying to produce an
outcome that is as close to what
the party's as intended as
possible, recognizing of course
that the whole chess board has
been upended.
A good example of that I think
was a case I did a couple of
years ago just after COVID in
Australia called Halifax.
So that's what it's sort of
known as.
If there's anybody who is a real
geek, I can give you the
citation.
In Australia it's 2021 FCA 531
and in New Zealand it's 2021
NZHC 1113.
That was the first time that the
Australian Federal Court and the
High Court of New Zealand sat
concurrently.
So that was a big thing in
international insolvency and the
topic of that litigation was the
failure of a stock broking firm.
So a whole lot of mum and dad
investors had contributed their
money to Halifax in Australia
and in the and in New Zealand as
essentially a brokerage firm.
And what had happened was that
that company had become
insolvent with their money
inside.
And so there was a question of
how these people could get their
money back.
They didn't actually own any of
the shares that they had
invested in.
They just had a bare claim
against the companies, and the
companies had owned the shares,
and they've been sort of betting
against the house, I suppose.
And So what we're able to do in
that litigation is say, well,
all of the funds of all of these
customers have been mixed.
Yeah, across these two companies
in Australia and New Zealand.
We can't actually work out who
owns what.
So what is the fairest way to
resolve this problem?
And the courts were
extraordinary in how they dealt
with it.
They really had, I think, the
interests, the commercial
interests of these people at the
forefront of their minds.
They sat simultaneously.
So the High Court of New Zealand
and the Federal Court of
Australia sat simultaneously.
We as the advocates appeared in
both courts at once.
So I was based in Australia but
appearing via video link in New
Zealand, making submissions to
both judges at once.
And the question for the judges
is, should we pull all of the
assets and distribute them pari
passu, so as in the amount you
put in, you get a proportion of
that amount as what you get out,
or should we do it in some other
way?
And ultimately, the court
decided that we should
distribute them, parry passu in
a way that sort of resulted in
people getting back a portion.
Yeah.
Of what they were entitled to.
Yeah.
And so I think, you know, you
asked about my approach,
memorable cases and anecdotes.
I think that's a really good
example of how the law tried to
follow commerce in that
circumstance and give people
back what was the fairest, most
predictable.
Yeah, well return well, I mean
that that sound like an amazing
case.
I mean, to be a part of that as
well whilst being solitary,
that's that's I think a once in
a lifetime sort of, yeah, to be
a part of.
It's a real highlight, yeah.
Yeah, I can, I can imagine, I
suppose in relation to that
being before the High Court and
dealing with things like
pressure and dealing with these
sort of, yeah, quite complex
matters and complex cases.
Do you find that you're
experiencing commercial law has
LED you, well, I suppose, in in
dealing with that, I suppose.
Well, what sort of things would
you, what sort of advice would
you give to a law student who
perhaps is sometimes a bit
overwhelmed, I think, with the
complexity of sort of the
commercial space?
Yeah.
And, and I mean, you know,
things like the Corporations Act
and some students would be doing
that at the moment in their
courses and things like that.
And I can tell you that, yeah, a
lot of people find these sorts
of things quite difficult to
grasp their their head around
upon first instance, Yeah.
Yeah.
Of course, yeah.
So let me tell you, I still
sometimes read cases and think,
what is the judge saying here?
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, one of the first things to
remember is sometimes it's you.
Sometimes you just don't have
the level of experience yet to
grasp the concepts that are
being referred to.
Sometimes it's not.
Sometimes it's not clear what
the judge is saying.
I think the best thing that I
the best practice for sort of
reading and understanding cases
that I can suggest is give
yourself time.
Read it slowly.
If you don't understand
something, read it again.
If you don't understand the
concept, go and work out what it
is.
And sometimes it can be, I
remember it's so frustrating
because it will take you hours
to read something and then you
ultimately realize it wasn't
relevant.
But that's just the part of the
process of becoming a lawyer and
a better lawyer.
So I think don't be disheartened
by it.
Know that people meet, read, and
this understand concepts all of
the time.
But now that also that it gets
better.
By the time you've been
practicing for 10 or 15 years,
you have a bit of an instinct
for for what the answer is
likely to be.
And then sometimes you're wrong.
But then I think every day since
I started practice I have found
research, for example, easier
because I have an idea now about
what to look for, where to go,
what the answer is likely to be.
When I read something that I
feel it just isn't quite right,
I know to keep looking.
Do you feel like you're more
studious now or when you're
perhaps a student?
I'll tell you what.
I'll tell you what the
difference is now.
When I was a law student, I I
was one of those losers who had
all of my assessments done two
weeks before they were.
Oh yeah, crazy.
Yeah.
Because I didn't like the last
minute.
Stress, I think it's the way to
do it, I think.
Yeah, everyone.
Else might be liking something
there.
Yeah, but if you, what I
discovered as a junior lawyer is
if you do everything before it's
due, people just give you more
work.
Yes.
Yeah.
And so there's never any actual
end date.
So as a consequence, over time,
I lament this with my colleagues
all the time.
You become very motivated by
panic.
Yes.
You become very motivated by
something is due tomorrow.
I've got to get it done.
Yeah.
So I think when you say was I'm
more studious as a law student,
I was certainly more structured
and organized, I guess because I
controlled the timeline a bit
more.
Whereas now I don't control
timelines and I'm usually
subject to client demands.
And the consequence of that is
usually that I am working very
hard, very late at night.
Yes, yeah, yeah, yeah.
And how do you deal with that?
Perhaps stress and that
workload?
Breaking things down one step at
a time.
I think it was similar to when I
had exams.
I used similar techniques to
when I was a law student or high
school student, which is you've
got a series of exams coming up,
a whole bunch of competing
deadlines.
When you look at them all as a
kind of an amorphous BLOB, you
think, however, will I do this?
And then the key, back then, I
used to just divide my day, like
get my calendar and allocate
time, you know, three hours for
this, two hours for that.
Break things down into little
chunks.
Something I was going to say in
relation to skills that I've
I've learned as a lawyer is to
when you get something and it's
overwhelming and you feel like
procrastinating.
I learnt this from Justice
McDougal, who I worked for.
Do it straight away.
Yeah, because it doesn't get
easier.
And that's really simple to say.
But when you say do it straight
away, do what?
Well, what I what I do is when
something is overwhelming, I
just write down the facts or do
a chronology, something like
that.
Because actually once you don't
realize at the time, you feel
confronted by the solution, not
knowing what that is.
Once you write out the facts,
you usually know what the
problem is.
And once you know what the
problem is, you usually know
what the solution is.
So you've just got to start like
get that chronology going.
Yeah, well, there's a saying
it's like 1/2.
The job is just like by like
writing it down or like
organized.
Yeah, like it's half, half the
task is sort of knowing what to
do I.
Suppose half the task is working
out.
What the problem?
Is yes.
Yeah, once you know what the
problem is, solving it isn't
actually all that hard.
It's sometimes clients come to
you and they can't speak a legal
language.
They don't know what's important
and what's not.
They come to you in a cluster of
emotion and problems and anguish
and I think what what will
really help you get through it
is right down facts.
Yeah.
Well, thanks so much.
We're approaching towards the
end of the podcast and I'd just
like to ask you some
standardized questions that we
asked all of our guests for our
students to get to know them a
little bit better.
So start off with my first one.
What was your favorite subject
in law school and why?
I think it was equity, as I
mentioned.
So Professor Stumbles who taught
that subject, because I could
see the real world application
of that subject.
Yeah, in commercial life and
things like directors duties,
the separation of legal and
beneficial interests, all of
that sort of just made sense to
me.
Some people love equity, some
people hate it.
I fell in the love camp.
Yeah, wow, Wow.
Moving on to the next one, do
you have a book or a movie
that's significant to you and
one you'd recommend to students?
OK, I've got 2 and they'll both
be quick.
The 1st is a book called Parting
Words.
So one of them is if you need
like a comforting word from your
grandpa and the other one is if
you want to know what to do with
yourself.
So the the comforting word from
your grandpa is Parting Words.
It's a book by a guy called
Benjamin Ferens.
It's called 9 Lessons for
Remarkable Life.
And he was a person who sort of
was raised as in New York, got a
scholarship to Harvard, ended up
fighting in the Second World
War, and there was a prosecutor
on the Nuremberg trials.
And so he wrote this book, I
think in about the year 2000, so
when he was 100 years old.
And they were essentially his
last lessons on life for us.
And it's a beautiful book.
And they are.
He's really encouraging.
And the essence of it is, you
know, be humble, embrace the
moment, go and do what you, you
know, listen to yourself, listen
to heart, that sort of thing.
I wholeheartedly recommend that
book.
If you need a little perk.
My grandfather is no longer with
us, and so he is.
This book is the best substitute
in those circumstances.
The other one I'd recommend to
you.
I read it when I was at
university and it really changed
the way that I saw what I would
do with my life.
And it's called The Most Good
You Can Do.
It's by Peter Singer, who is a,
he's a retired now philosopher
from Yale University.
And, and the, the thesis of the
most good you can do is that by
earning more, you can contribute
more good to society.
So if you live modestly,
contribute more through
effective charities, you can
actually do just as much good as
if you were sort of on the front
line doing the, you know, the
human rights advocacy work, for
example, that is so important.
Something that I learned from
that book as well is, you know,
if you have a degree in law and
work as a lawyer puts you in an
extraordinarily privileged
position where you know more
about the justice system and the
political system than most of
people in society.
And so with that comes with a
huge power to be able to
influence people to make
decisions for good, including.
And that doesn't mean that if
you're in a corporate sphere,
you have no space to do
anything.
You can speak to colleagues, use
your influence.
And I've sort of done that over
time.
You know, when I was at Allen
and Ovary working, we worked for
an NGO called the Human Dignity
Trust which had at it's focus
empowering local activist groups
in countries where it was still
illegal to be gay, to try and
work with their law officers to
change the laws there.
So you can, you know, working
with somebody like Alan Ovary
gives you the gravitas to be
able to help local organisations
in that way.
So I just wouldn't, I would
encourage people to read that
book, but in particular not to
write off corporate law firms as
sort of the epicentre of greed
and social ills.
If you're clever about it, and
if you don't get sucked into the
sort of all of the trappings of
commercial law, they actually
offer a really powerful
opportunity to do something for
good.
Thank you so much for that
insight.
Now to the the last question.
Sure.
What's 1 habit you believe has
been pivotal to your success in
the legal field?
I think it's what I mentioned
before that Justice McDougal
taught me, which was it doesn't
get easier if you procrastinate.
Yeah, do it now.
If you can do it now.
Break it down into tiny bits.
Write down the facts.
Yeah.
Wow.
Well, Karen, thank you so much
for joining me today that we've
run out of time and I just wish
you all the best for the rest of
the year.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.