When we reported a couple of weeks ago that Masterchef contestants Peter Kritikides and Adam Liaw, both lawyers, had variously:
- participated in a firm-sanctioned chest-waxing; and
- proclaimed a belief that “it is a God-given right for a Prime Minister to host a secret sex party with a bunch of hookers and other Prime Ministers”,
we thought we had adequately exposed the dirt on this year’s show. Oh how we burnt the toast on that one!
A trickle of anonymous comments began filtering through last week in relation to something slightly fishy. First we received this, from an anonymous Clutz spy:
Which Clayton Utz employee is currently sweating like, shall we say, a Masterchef contestant in the “pressure cooker”?
At that point, we had no idea what was going on, but surmised that it must have involved Clayton Utz lawyer Claire Winton Burn (for those keeping score – we incorrectly stated that she’d been voted off the show in our earlier Masterchef post). But we never would have guessed that it involved Claire’s entangelment in a sizzling office romance with a Clayton Utz lawyer. Or that the relevant Clayton Utz lawyer is, in his spare time, a father to three young children.
In an article entitled How Claire’s affair sizzled, the Daily Telegraph walks readers ingredient by ingredient step by step through Claire Winton Burn’s corporate love affair. And the news isn’t good for beleagured Clayton Utz partners:
[Claire] is in a relationship with a work colleague at … Clayton Utz, which made her so miserable she joined the reality show searching for a better life. The problem is, the colleague left his wife and three children for Claire just after the birth of his third child. A recent interview Claire gave to New Idea set a cat among the pigeons at the law firm when Claire named the man as her “partner”, something which also shocked the ex who is struggling at home alone with a baby and two other young ones. Claire refused to comment on the relationship when we contacted her. Her partner was tight-lipped, but offered this when we called for comment. I don’t really want to talk to the press about anything, Claire’s told me,” he said. “I don’t really have anything to contribute, thank you.”
We were preparing last night to report on this kitchen nightmare when the following email came through:
I have been following the claire winton burn story with regards to her alleged relationship with a clayton utz lawyer. We have his name and he was apparently off work yesterday and at this stage I disclose I am a freelance tabloid photojournalist.
We photographed the alleged ‘partner’ read not a law firm partner, in Melbourne today.
The funny thing is pictures which were online of the male party have since been removed so we are unable to corroborate our pictures. Its seems Clayton Utz or the male party concerned are doing everything they can to isolate the firm from the story.
If I send you a picture of the male person for your use, (publication) can you please try to corroborate the identity of the person in the picture, assuming it is the name of the male lawyer in the construction division that Claire once worked.
I am available to email both the name of the alleged male in the relationship and a photo taken today which I believe is that person. I can be contacted on 04######## or ####@#########.com.au
Regards,
Jamie Fawcett
Yes, Jamie Fawcett – the same esteemed paparazzo who made headlines in 2005 for placing a listening device under the water meter outside Nicole Kidman’s home. He was thereafter labelled Sydney’s “most disliked freelance photographer”.
At this stage Jamie, in the interests of protecting the welfare and livelihood of the three young children (not to mention their poor mother) whose lives appear poised to be irrevocably shaped by your prospective “naming and shaming” of their father, we will decline to name the man in question. So perhaps you should place that photo under your water meter. Or in your oven. Just dont bother sending it through to us.
It is difficult to believe that the pantry full of 2010 misfortune could grow any mouldier for Clayton Utz. But it has. So far in 2010:
- 14 very profitable, well respected partners defected from the Clayton Utz to build two Australian offices of Magic Circle firm Allen & Overy;
- Clayton Utz sacked over 30% of its Melbourne graduates;
- a former employee was given leave to pursue further claims against the Clutz for alleged sexual harassment and bullying;
- the firm was stripped of its credentials as an employer of choice for women by the Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency;
- a librarian has created considerable controversy by hording an inordinate amount of firm fruit; and
- a Clutz lawyer appearing on a reality TV show revealed her homewrecking past, cooking up a dish of office romance with a side of “single-mother-left-with-three-young-kids”.
Send the Firm Spy your news and views!
Loading...
Did anyone see what she just said when asked why she didn’t want to go home – she said “Because I’ve got nothing to go back to!” Apparently she hasn’t got her practising certificate anymore.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/entertainment/1073614/masterchefs-claire-misses-married-partner
this is a situation where everything about James Fawcett is totally appropriate. go get ‘em JF.
Ms Winton is being very Gen-X by wanting a career and the TV show loot as well as another woman’s husband.
Me want. Me want! is the call of the Gen-Xer.
first, let’s kill all the lawyers.
Dear Firm Spy,
I have read your comments in relation to my original enquiry which you chose to publish.
“Yes, Jamie Fawcett – the same esteemed paparazzo who made headlines in 2005 for placing a listening device under the water meter outside Nicole Kidman’s home. He was thereafter labelled Sydney’s “most disliked freelance photographer”.
At this stage Jamie, in the interests of protecting the welfare and livelihood of the three young children (not to mention their poor mother) whose lives appear poised to be irrevocably shaped by your prospective “naming and shaming” of their father, we will decline to name the man in question. So perhaps you should place that photo under your water meter. Or in your oven. Just dont bother sending it through to us.”
For the record, you will note the nature of my enquiry was firstly following the same legitimate line of enquiry that you, FirmSpy, was planning itself to report. This issue, as is being pursued by all media, only concerns the name of the solicitor alleged to be the partner of Claire Winton Burn and the media response and test of the public interest is adequately served.
The fact you sought to both publish and later diminish the nature of my enquiry (whilst pursuing it yourself) as some public spirited attempt to protect the wife and kids is disingenuous. Your attempt to defame me by mentioning ever-so-carefully the headlines of an incident that was dismissed before trial is testament to your skewed approach to your so-called journalist endeavours.
The fact is you choose to publish these issues in the first place and when you get a legitimate enquiry made by an accreditated journalist the first thing you do is google and to attempt to slander me.
For the record, I am neither planning announcing the name of the alleged partner, as I am not a publisher (unlike you) and for obvious legal reasons, neither are you.
If you choose to report on my media activities next time, just make sure you try to get them right and perhaps get off your ‘soap-box’ before you fall and dislodge the finger from your ars……..
THE SPY’S RESPONSE
Jamie – we’re still chuckling at your reference to yourself as “an accreditated [sic] journalist”. Perhaps you had a paparazzo’s camera lens up your ars…….. when you wrote that?