I am an American lawyer but the same principles apply because we are former colonies of Great Britain. Law does not equal justice. They certainly have a relationship but one is not a definition of the other. Law only covers specific areas of life, not justice in the Jesus sense of Sermon on the Mount. People talk to me all the time about demanding to sue someone b/c of a wrong. You need a law on the books. Lawsuits, esp.. here in the States, drag on forever and are drainiing for all parties, esp. the plaintiffs (the ones suing). A letter to a large newspaper would prob. get you more justice. If only suit proceeds, it is not as press worthy as a class action.
After 9/11, Congress passed legislation to compensate the victims. Clearly, they could still sue in regular court and win more money. A normal law suit, however, could take more than ten years. There is no guarantee of a monetary judgment. After a trial court enters judgment, the appeals process is even slower. With the exception of a few very wealthy families, everyone opted for fash cash up front. Many families with vast sums of money and sophistication remarked money was not worth the stress on their lives. They needed to memorialize the person and engage in meaningful activities to make some sense of the loss.
Law evolved around commerce/trade and crimes, primarily against the state, over centuries. Many rape victims agree to plea deals or tell no one b/c the more serious assault occurs at trial. Defense lawyers can ask demeaning, crushing questions. My own experience is an illustration. I broke my ankle at the YMCA, slipping outside the pool area. Negligence is not my strong suit but I know the law and procedures. I thought I could be detached. Well, I was wrong. My emotions get stirred up. It is a simple, little lawsuit but it can engulf me. A prominent NY doctor specialized in a rare, vicious cancer. He became afflicted. He thought it would be a great teaching example b/c he could be detached and teach. He became totally swamped by the illness, despite his expertise.
Some lawsuits make sense. I worked in the civil rights movement. The groups meet and plot strategy. One group does not want to mess up another group's litigation. The coordination is tremendous. When I worked for NOW, local lawyers were sending cases up through the federal appeals and Supreme Court. Law profs and more seasoned lawyers were keenly aware that this course was disastrous. Their aim was to stay out of federal court because a loss is staggering in its aftermath. I am not suggesting not to sue to enforce a right. Merely, that law is very different than TV law.
Australia may have procedures, separate from sex abuse, that make it hard to make these claims. Burdens of proof are important. Important evidence might be barred. Statutes of limitations exist. Finally, I believe money makes predators and their henchmen accountable. Sex abuse is impulsive, though. Money will not reverse a PTSD problem. It doesn't hurt, though, does it?
