web analytics
Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers represented four individuals, ie the plaintiffs, in proceedings heard in the Supreme Court of NSW.  Pursuant to those proceedings, Terry Goldberg ostensibly misleads the Court by claiming in an Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs that he acted for the sixth defendant in such proceedings, when in fact that sixth defendant was unrepresented.

Terence Goldberg then unlawfully sued that sixth defendant to pay the legal costs of his clients.  The sixth defendant, an association, was then wound up and its building sold to pay such costs with the residual funds belonging to that association somehow making their way to a sham entity based at the home address of two long-time acquaintances of Terence Goldberg, ie Jon Adrian Lindsay and Miranda McCarthy (aka Mandy Miami), at 3/349 Bourke Street, Darlinghurst NSW 2010 (with both of those two long-time acquaintances of Terence Goldberg being members of the church), with Terence Goldberg having a direct hand in the setting up of the said sham entity.

The above bears all the hallmarks of fraudulent activity (see section 192E of the Crimes Act 1900).  The above also defied the only Order made by the Court in those proceedings which was that each party was to pay their own costs.

Significantly, the sixth defendant had accrued no costs, and as there was no Order made for one party to pay the costs of any other, Terence Goldberg was prohibited from claiming costs from any defendant, which he went on to do.  In this matter, Terry Goldberg makes a myriad of misleading and conflicting statements in a number of various documents, all seemingly to his benefit.

The above has been made known to the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner (the solicitor conduct overseer) and the Law Society of NSW, with both of those bodies turning a blind eye at all times.

Some would have you believe that the matter is complex, when, in fact, the matter is simplicity in itself.  Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers could only have sued Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated for his legal costs if the church had been Turner Freeman's client.  The church was not Turner Freeman's client.

As Terence Goldberg acted for the four plaintiffs in the matter and also named the church as the sixth defendant, therefore placing the church in opposition to the four plaintiffs, it does not take a legal mind to deduce that the church was not his client.  Also, and which is also obvious to all and sundry, if the church were Terence Goldberg's client, it would not have been left as an unrepresented party in the proceedings; which it was.  Any suggestion that the church was Turner Freeman's client is clearly absurd.

See below a selection of letters to and from John McKenzie, the Legal Services Commissioner.  You will see that Mr McKenzie, like Terence Goldberg, also makes statements which are unable to be true.  Click on the letters to view a pdf version.

A list of the Court documents involved as well as other pertinent documents relating to this matter can be found on this site's other page by clicking on this link or by choosing 'The Evidence' in the menu. You will see that all Court documents support the claim that Terence Goldberg did not act for Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated in any capacity.
Fraud and corruption, OLSC
Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers represented four individuals, ie the plaintiffs, in proceedings heard in the Supreme Court of NSW.  Pursuant to those proceedings, Terry Goldberg ostensibly misleads the Court by claiming in an Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs that he acted for the sixth defendant in such proceedings, when in fact that sixth defendant was unrepresented.

Terence Goldberg then unlawfully sued that sixth defendant to pay the legal costs of his clients.  The sixth defendant, an association, was then wound up and its building sold to pay such costs with the residual funds belonging to that association somehow making their way to a sham entity based at the home address of two long-time acquaintances of Terence Goldberg, ie Jon Adrian Lindsay and Miranda McCarthy (aka Mandy Miami), at 3/349 Bourke Street, Darlinghurst NSW 2010 (with both of those two long-time acquaintances of Terence Goldberg being members of the church), with Terence Goldberg having a direct hand in the setting up of the said sham entity.

The above bears all the hallmarks of fraudulent activity (see section 192E of the Crimes Act 1900).  The above also defied the only Order made by the Court in those proceedings which was that each party was to pay their own costs.

Significantly, the sixth defendant had accrued no costs, and as there was no Order made for one party to pay the costs of any other, Terence Goldberg was prohibited from claiming costs from any defendant, which he went on to do.  In this matter, Terry Goldberg makes a myriad of misleading and conflicting statements in a number of various documents, all seemingly to his benefit.

The above has been made known to the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner (the solicitor conduct overseer) and the Law Society of NSW, with both of those bodies turning a blind eye at all times.

Some would have you believe that the matter is complex, when, in fact, the matter is simplicity in itself.  Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers could only have sued Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated for his legal costs if the church had been Turner Freeman's client.  The church was not Turner Freeman's client.

As Terence Goldberg acted for the four plaintiffs in the matter and also named the church as the sixth defendant, therefore placing the church in opposition to the four plaintiffs, it does not take a legal mind to deduce that the church was not his client.  Also, and which is also obvious to all and sundry, if the church were Terence Goldberg's client, it would not have been left as an unrepresented party in the proceedings; which it was.  Any suggestion that the church was Turner Freeman's client is clearly absurd.

See below a selection of letters to and from John McKenzie, the Legal Services Commissioner.  You will see that Mr McKenzie, like Terence Goldberg, also makes statements which are unable to be true.  Click on the letters to view a pdf version.

A list of the Court documents involved as well as other pertinent documents relating to this matter can be found on this site's other page by clicking on this link or by choosing 'The Evidence' in the menu. You will see that all Court documents support the claim that Terence Goldberg did not act for Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated in any capacity.
2 London Street, Enmore
“I am a partner in the firm Turner Freeman and in that capacity have care, conduct and control of the matter on behalf of the plaintiffs.”

Terry Goldberg, in his affidavits of 24 and 25 November 2009

“I am a partner in the firm Turner Freeman and in that capacity have care, conduct and control of the matter on behalf of the plaintiffs.”

Terry Goldberg, in his affidavits of 24 and 25 November 2009

“I am not satisfied there is sufficient evidence to persuade the Tribunal that Mr Goldberg acted other than on instructions in making the statements, or that he knew such statements were false, untrue or baseless at the time he made them.”

John McKenzie, NSW Legal Services Commissioner, 2 June 2015

“I am not satisfied there is sufficient evidence to persuade the Tribunal that Mr Goldberg acted other than on instructions in making the statements, or that he knew such statements were false, untrue or baseless at the time he made them.”

John McKenzie, NSW Legal Services Commissioner, 2 June 2015

Click here for the pdf version of the above letter to John McKenzie of the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner:  2017 11 28 - Letter to John McKenzie - Terence Goldberg, fraud
"Mr Terence Goldberg representing Turner Freeman Lawyers discussed updates regarding the setting up of the association's new Trust. Mr Goldberg advised that the lawyers of Perpetual Trustees are currently reviewing the Deed that Turner Freeman Lawyers have prepared with regards to the new association, which will be called 'Congregation of Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated'."

From minutes of 'meeting of creditors' at Jones Partners (liquidator), 29 May 2014

"Mr Terence Goldberg representing Turner Freeman Lawyers discussed updates regarding the setting up of the association's new Trust. Mr Goldberg advised that the lawyers of Perpetual Trustees are currently reviewing the Deed that Turner Freeman Lawyers have prepared with regards to the new association, which will be called 'Congregation of Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated'."

From minutes of 'meeting of creditors' at Jones Partners (liquidator), 29 May 2014

Click here for the pdf version of the above letter to John McKenzie of the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner:  2017 11 27 - Letter to John McKenzie - inducement
"It has been made known to you on innumerable occasions, over a protracted period of time, that Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers could not have acted for the sixth Defendant in Supreme Court proceedings 2009/00291458-001, as not only did Mr Goldberg act for the four Plaintiffs in such proceedings, but that the sixth Defendant was in fact an unrepresented party. A simple telephone call to the Supreme Court of NSW can, and will, confirm such."

In a letter from Symn Waters to John McKenzie, 31 August 2017

"It has been made known to you on innumerable occasions, over a protracted period of time, that Terence Goldberg of Turner Freeman Lawyers could not have acted for the sixth Defendant in Supreme Court proceedings 2009/00291458-001, as not only did Mr Goldberg act for the four Plaintiffs in such proceedings, but that the sixth Defendant was in fact an unrepresented party. A simple telephone call to the Supreme Court of NSW can, and will, confirm such."

In a letter from Symn Waters to John McKenzie, 31 August 2017

Click here for the pdf version of the above letter to John McKenzie of the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner:  2017 11 27 - Letter to John McKenzie - resiled from previous position
“In this matter, we acted for Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated, Reverend Patricia Cleary, Caroline Allen, Miranda McCarthy and Matilda Vila collectively and as individuals.”

One of Terence Goldberg's many untrue statements in an Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs, as filed with the Supreme Court on 23 June 2010

“In this matter, we acted for Enmore Spiritualist Church Incorporated, Reverend Patricia Cleary, Caroline Allen, Miranda McCarthy and Matilda Vila collectively and as individuals.”

One of Terence Goldberg's many untrue statements in an Application for Assessment of Solicitor/Client Costs, as filed with the Supreme Court on 23 June 2010

Click here for the pdf version of the above letter to John McKenzie of the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner:  2017 09 06 - Letter to John McKenzie - response to letter of 31 08 2017
“I do not accept the statements you have identified as being false, misleading and untrue, namely statements that:
i. Mr Goldberg acted for the Sixth Defendant in Supreme Court proceedings 2009/00291458-001 (the 2009 Proceedings)
ii. The Plaintiffs in the 2009 Proceedings brought their action on behalf of the Sixth Defendant.
were in fact false, misleading and untrue.”


John McKenzie's untrue statements in his letter of 7 August 2017

“I do not accept the statements you have identified as being false, misleading and untrue, namely statements that:
i. Mr Goldberg acted for the Sixth Defendant in Supreme Court proceedings 2009/00291458-001 (the 2009 Proceedings)
ii. The Plaintiffs in the 2009 Proceedings brought their action on behalf of the Sixth Defendant.
were in fact false, misleading and untrue.”


John McKenzie's untrue statements in his letter of 7 August 2017

Click here for the pdf version of the above letter from John McKenzie of the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner:  2017 08 31 - Letter from John McKenzie, OLSC - no further responses - received on 05 09 2017
"Clause 30 of the Constitution of Enmore Spiritualist Church Inc is in the following form:
'30. lf upon the winding up or dissolution of the Church there remains after satisfaction of all its debts and liabilities any property whatsoever, the same shall not be paid or distributed amongst the Members of the Church, but shall be given or transferred to some other institution or institutions having objects similar to those of the Church and which shall prohibit the distribution of its of their income and property amongst its or their Members, and if this provision cannot be satisfied then to some charitable object.'"


In a letter from Michael Jones (Jones Partners, liquidator) to Church member, 7 November 2012

"Clause 30 of the Constitution of Enmore Spiritualist Church Inc is in the following form:
'30. lf upon the winding up or dissolution of the Church there remains after satisfaction of all its debts and liabilities any property whatsoever, the same shall not be paid or distributed amongst the Members of the Church, but shall be given or transferred to some other institution or institutions having objects similar to those of the Church and which shall prohibit the distribution of its of their income and property amongst its or their Members, and if this provision cannot be satisfied then to some charitable object.'"


In a letter from Michael Jones (Jones Partners, liquidator) to Church member, 7 November 2012

Click here for the pdf version of the above letter to John McKenzie of the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner:  2017 08 31 - Letter to John McKenzie - corrupt conduct
"Your claim that Turner Freeman acted with four of its clients as Plaintiffs and another of its clients as a Defendant, in the same proceedings, is an utter nonsense and defies logic, as well as the rule of law.

The Order as made by Justice Bergin in proceedings 2009/00291458-001 prohibited any Plaintiff from seeking or indemnifying their costs against any Defendant in the same matter, and that is exactly what took place, with Terence Goldberg suing the sixth Defendant to pay his clients’ costs, having used deceptive methods to do so."


In a letter from Symn Waters to John McKenzie, 10 August 2017

"Your claim that Turner Freeman acted with four of its clients as Plaintiffs and another of its clients as a Defendant, in the same proceedings, is an utter nonsense and defies logic, as well as the rule of law.

The Order as made by Justice Bergin in proceedings 2009/00291458-001 prohibited any Plaintiff from seeking or indemnifying their costs against any Defendant in the same matter, and that is exactly what took place, with Terence Goldberg suing the sixth Defendant to pay his clients’ costs, having used deceptive methods to do so."


In a letter from Symn Waters to John McKenzie, 10 August 2017

Click here for the pdf version of the above letter to John McKenzie of the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner:  2017 08 10 - Letter to John McKenzie - false statements
“And I was acting for the sixth defendant [in Supreme Court proceedings 2009/00291458-001]"

"The plaintiffs bring their action on behalf of the sixth defendant and that is what happened..."

Terence Goldberg's untrue statements on oath in the Local Court, Sydney, 26 February 2016

“And I was acting for the sixth defendant [in Supreme Court proceedings 2009/00291458-001]"

"The plaintiffs bring their action on behalf of the sixth defendant and that is what happened..."

Terence Goldberg's untrue statements on oath in the Local Court, Sydney, 26 February 2016

Click here for the pdf version of the above letter from John McKenzie of the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner:  2017 08 07 - Letter from John McKenzie, OLSC - false statements - received on 09 08 2017
“The point of my letter of 2 June 2015 was that even if the statements were in fact false, misleading and untrue, as you contend, that would not necessarily result in disciplinary action being taken against Mr Goldberg."

John McKenzie, 7 August 2017

“The point of my letter of 2 June 2015 was that even if the statements were in fact false, misleading and untrue, as you contend, that would not necessarily result in disciplinary action being taken against Mr Goldberg."

John McKenzie, 7 August 2017

Click here for the pdf version of the above letter to John McKenzie of the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner:  2017 08 07 - Letter to John McKenzie - Court stamps
"The Chairperson advised that the quorum requirements set out in Regulation 5.6.16(2) of the Corporations Regulations had been met and that a quorum was properly present."

From minutes of non-quorate and unlawful meeting of creditors at Jones Partners (liquidator), 29 May 2014, in which Terence Goldberg was the sole attendee and not a creditor of the association

"The Chairperson advised that the quorum requirements set out in Regulation 5.6.16(2) of the Corporations Regulations had been met and that a quorum was properly present."

From minutes of non-quorate and unlawful meeting of creditors at Jones Partners (liquidator), 29 May 2014, in which Terence Goldberg was the sole attendee and not a creditor of the association

Click here for the pdf version of the letter to John McKenzie of the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner:  2017 08 02 - Letter to John McKenzie - copied to the Court
"I ask you the question, and I place an emphasis upon such question: On what basis do you, your office and the Law Society repeatedly and continuously maintain your position that Terence Goldberg acted for the sixth Defendant in proceedings 2009/00291458-001?"

In a letter from Symn Waters to John McKenzie, 27 October 2016
No response was received

"I ask you the question, and I place an emphasis upon such question: On what basis do you, your office and the Law Society repeatedly and continuously maintain your position that Terence Goldberg acted for the sixth Defendant in proceedings 2009/00291458-001?"

In a letter from Symn Waters to John McKenzie, 27 October 2016
No response was received

Click here for the pdf version of the letter to John McKenzie of the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner:  2016 10 27 - Letter to John McKenzie - on what basis