Rod, thank you again for your answer
Are you able to point me in the right direction for the Victorian case please?
I'm not sure it is possible to implement these solutions
Although there are several legal issues in my case that are problematic, there are four in principal:
1. There are specific rules of court in UCPR which were ignored, which, if followed, would have prevented case management in the first place
2. There is a statutory test applied to all instruments of the type involved in my matter as part of daily legal practice by almost all lawyers (except life-long transactionalists) which is organic to how two acts work, and have worked since beginning of English Common law. The test prevents litigation [statute-bar] unless the rules in [1.] are satisfied on discovery
3. The UK precedent involved has been an authority since the late 19th century, so the Australian Parliament cannot create a retrospective legislation because it lacks pre-1900 jurisdiction
[NOTE: the precedent in fact is no longer an authority (since 1973?) for the vast majority of the matters it is still cited in for its test!]
4. If I am correct, any [at least NSW] judgement that relied on expert witness testimony such as that in my case would be subject to perjury on the witness' part, but also incompetence by the legal practitioners who selected and instructed them
However I agree the resolution would be up to the legislature which I am initiating today
What happens to whistleblowers like me? I do not want to repeat the McBride (a lawyer) experience...but I have a strong sense of justice, never mind just outcome in my matter