Chairman Mal going off about cricket - Shorten or Gillard's cheating and corruption not so much
Pauline Hanson with questions for Julie Bishop over Australian aid funding for Palestinian terrorists

Slater and Gordon - the last payee on the Workplace Reform Association's cheque for $67,000 - Ralph Blewitt's amazing windfall!

Many thanks to SteveJ and Marmion for their substantial contributions to this post.

On the afternoon of 19 July 1996 Bill Ludwig's lawyer Brian Kilmartin (from Sciacca and Co) phoned Susan Grant of Slater and Gordon's finance department.

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 11.11.48 am

Two days later on 24 July 1996 Peter Gordon spoke with Kilmartin.

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 11.11.48 am

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 11.11.48 am

On 30 July, Geoff Shaw attended a conference with a solicitor from Victorian legal practitioners professional indemnity insurance provider - Geoff Masel of Phillips Fox.

This list describes the Kerr Street related receipts, ledgers and cheque details that Shaw took to the meeting.

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 1.57.32 pm


On that same day, Shaw spoke to Kilmartin.

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 11.11.48 am

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 11.11.48 am

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 2.06.07 pm

On 5 August Shaw sent the Slater and Gordon financial ledgers for the Blewitt conveyance and mortgage to Kilmartin.

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 2.15.15 pm


That same day, Kilmartin wrote to Shaw effecting service of a Subpoena for the Blewitt conveyance and mortgage files.

1110- Subpoena for Production LUGWIG v HARRISON & ORS 95-1296 by Michael Smith on Scribd

And here's the issue that both SteveJ and Marmion raised with me in separate emails over the past few days.

It relates to this handwritten note.

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 1.52.17 pm

Trust Receipt last payee.

I'll let StevenJ take it from here.

The thought occurred to me that it would be unusual for a solicitor from Brisbane to be ringing someone in the accounts department of a solicitor in Melbourne.

That wouldn’t normally occur unless it related to a current matter and involved some fund transfers.

The call was obviously about the Kerr St transaction and in particular the $67k. Something that had happened 3½ years previously and in which Sciacca’s had only one involvement we know of.

How did he have the name “Susan Grant”.

Could this have been the person to whom the fax was addressed?

Any chance of tracking her down?

Also it looks to me like the handwritten note says “trust receipt last payee” with last crossed out.

Looks like this list is what Gordon wants a subpoena from Kilmartin about.

A payee is of course the person to whom payment is directed.

A trust receipt would evidence a payment directed to S&G trust a/c. It is a receipt to the payer not the payee.

The note seems to indicate some understanding that there was a chain of payees before it hit the S&G trust a/c.

I have said before that the Sciacca’s fax must have been along the lines of “the WRA owed Blewitt and paid him by cheque which he then endorsed to S&G trust a/c and arranged a direct deposit”.

Again it has always really been about how did Sciaccas get involved and who instructed them. It has to have come from Wilson and how did he get the name of the person in accounts that it had to be directed to.

Can only have been JEG or NOB.


Marmion was on the same page as Steve.

It was unprofessional for Kilmartin to ring Susan Grant directly without the prior agreement of SGA partners. Shows Ludwig was throwing his weight around.
How did Kilmartin know of Grant?
Maybe, Ludwig had first rung Gillard asking who was Slater's accountant that he should ring?
Since this was only weeks after Madgwick's judgment that Blewitt repay his redundancy, I suspect Ludwig was chasing down any funds Blewitt had received from the AWU-WRA Inc.
As I noted in my online comment, Kilmartin was acting on Ludwig's instructions, so his enquiries of SNG actually reveal a lot of Ludwig's knowledge and involvement.
And this is Marmion's brilliant comment from a previous post touching on this matter.
Solicitors act only on the instructions of their client.

Brian Kilmartin acted for Bill Ludwig, when he sought information directly from Slater & Gordon’s accountant rather than approaching the partners first.

Then, his subsequent conversations with Peter Gordon and Geoff Shaw show much of Bill Ludwig’s knowledge of the matter including:

1. The odd incorporation of the AWU-WRA Inc under non-industrial legislation;
2. The receipt by the AWU-WRA Inc of payments from Theiss;
3. The payment on 18th March 1993 of an AWU-WRA Inc cheque for $67,722.32 to Slater & Gordon’s Trust Account;
4. Something about the nature of the Trust Receipt issued by Slater & Gordon for this payment NOT showing the AWU-WRA Inc as the drawer of the cheque, but perhaps showing instead the name of “the last payee” – whatever that means;

So, why would Bill Ludwig have such knowledge to give these instructions to Brian Kilmartin?

What WAS his role in the matter?

More soon on the extent of Slater and Gordon's file-filleting before the subpoena was returned.