Nov 27, 2012

Deal gone sour: bad blood between Slaters and Nowicki?

Harry Nowicki, a key figure in the claims against Julia Gillard over the AWU issue, saw a potential deal with Slater & Gordon (the law firm at the centre of the scandal) fall through two years ago.

Andrew Crook — Former <em>Crikey</em> Senior Journalist

Andrew Crook

Former Crikey Senior Journalist

Harry Nowicki, the chief funder of Ralph Blewitt’s trip Down Under to assail the Prime Minister, was denied tens of millions of dollars by the law firm at the centre of the case.

Nowicki, a former personal injury lawyer who was fined $15,000 for professional misconduct by Victoria’s legal services commissioner last year, confirmed to Crikey this morning that Slater & Gordon had done due diligence on his former firm Nowicki Carbone in 2010, because it was seeking to purchase a share of it.

Free Trial

Proudly annoying those in power since 2000.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

6 thoughts on “Deal gone sour: bad blood between Slaters and Nowicki?

  1. geomac62

    Well done in filling in some blanks about various characters pushing the barrow .

  2. Will Arnott

    If you want to know about Harry, ask his one time partner and bestie Greg Barnes.

  3. zut alors

    All players in this farce should remember the one about people in glasshouses not throwing stones.

  4. dazza

    George Brandis and Barnaby Joyce at Smiths wedding?? The plot thickens…

  5. tonyfunnywalker

    Nowicki – the Carpetbagger of Sleaze.

    The Law Society in Victoria have much to answer for.

  6. klewso

    And that “house” was it a “home” – as has been sold/implied in our media editing our news?
    Wilson (7:30 last night) made it sound like “a half-way house”? Somewhere to put his head down when he was in Melbourne – not much of a place to “stay/reside” (as Limited News’ Milne and company said Gillard did), because for most of the time it was being used for union business, with the comings and goings of members and meetings?

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details