About Joseph Burke Law

Joseph Burke Law is a boutique firm that has been operating in Melbourne’s Central Business District since 2013.

The principal, Joseph Burke, holds degrees in Science, Arts and Law from the University of Melbourne. Prior to establishing Joseph Burke Law, he engaged in a parliamentary internship with a state government member of the legislative assembly, worked in multiple law firms and also assisted as a volunteer board member of a large community legal centre.

Since its establishment, this law firm has been involved in a wide variety of legal matters and has represented clients in a broad practice that includes the County Court of Victoria, The Supreme Court of Victoria, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia and the High Court of Australia. Below are some of our recent published cases:

Director of Public Prosecutions v Hall [2024] VSC 791 (19 December 2024)This was a Supreme Court Application for Judicial Review brought by the Director of Public Prosecutions in an attempt to overturn the outcome of an alleged drink driving case that was won by Joseph Burke Law in the Magistrates Court. The application for judicial review was refused, and the accused remains lawfully acquitted of all charges.
[An Insurance Company] v Fair Work Ombudsman [2024] FCA 1366 (28 November 2024)An insurance company was defended by Joseph Burke Law in a Federal Court appeal into an excessive fine that was imposed at first instance by the Federal Circuit and Family Court. It was held the fine was excessive, and the fine was reduced.
DPP v Kandel [2021] VCC 2183 (30 November 2021)Joseph Burke Law acted on behalf of an accused who pleaded guilty to Dangerous Driving Causing Death in the County Court of Victoria. Under normal circumstances jail would be expected in such a situation, but the accused was sentenced to a Community Correction Order and completely avoided jail.
Hinch (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2021] VSCA 214 (5 August 2021)This was an appeal to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria in relation to a jury finding into a sexual offence. It was held that the decision made by the Jury was not open to the Jury given the admissible evidence in the matter, and the client was acquitted of the most serious charges.
DuluxGroup (Australia) Pty Ltd v Hado (No 3) [2021] FCCA 59 (19 January 2021)A bankruptcy matter in the Federal Circuit Court which involved an application for a sequestration order resulting from a debt that wasn’t contested in the Magistrates’ Court but was denied by our client in accordance with the principles of Ramsay Health Care which allowed the court to look behind the Magistrates’ Court judgement. The sequestration order was set aside.
Director of Public Prosecutions v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym) [2017] HCA 41This highly cited case, which is now in criminal textbooks, is one which required representation from Joseph Burke Law all the way from the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria to the High Court of Australia. This case is authority for the proposition that Contemporary Sentencing Practice is one factor to be taken into account in sentencing but is not to be taken as the determinative sentencing criterion.