Legal Aid is public money, publicly allocated out of state taxes on a year by year basis. It isn't a barrister - run organization, that barristers can dip into in the interests of their clients. ...
And like public money, managed by a gazetted Public Servant, answerable to the Crown, it has far more requests for assistance than funds.
This is where the panel comes into the equation. Borce's plea would be assessed as either winnable, or important as a legal precedent, perhaps, the likelihood of prison, the gravity of the crime, the social implications of the crime ( because this is, I repeat , public money. No government is in the business of assisting criminals to access highprofile barristers at whim )
Should Legal Aid agree to finance Borce, it would be on the basis that Stary had set out a defence that adhered to understood guidelines, had veracity and integrity, and cast a degree of doubt over the claim as to make the possibility of being found not guilty likely.
So Stary has to cut the coat of Borce according to the cloth allocated to it, and under the supervision of Legal Aid.
Nothing is free, you know. Everything has a price tag, and there is no such thing as Free Legal Representation. It isn't called Aid for nothing. It's because it AIDS the defendant in his /her pursuit of justice, should the panel find the money will be used according to Legal Aid guidelines.. .. not Rob Stary/Borce guidelines.
That's what 'conditions' will apply in this legal filigree.
Perhaps this covers your point:
The interests of justice and the extent of legal representation in trials
When considering whether to make a grant of legal assistance for a criminal law trial, VLA must consider a number matters, including:
whether it is in the interests of justice to aid the matter, having regard to the nature and extent of assistance sought by the applicant
the merits of the application for a grant of legal assistance.
The ‘interests of justice’ is not a closed category.
The merits of the application will be considered when determining the extent of legal representation to be provided.
VLA may decide to limit any grant of legal assistance:
to a plea of guilty
to assistance to follow a specific defence argument or arguments
to any other form of assistance considered appropriate in the circumstances.
and
County Court trials and Supreme Court trials
. . .
A recommendation to aid a trial must contain a clear file note as to the following:
the client’s instructions
the proposed plea. If the matter is proceeding to trial, the practitioner must file note the reasons that a plea of guilty is not appropriate.
A brief statement as to the evidence to be relied upon. Where a statement, or piece of evidence, is determinative of a particular issue, that piece of evidence must be easily identifiable, to enable compliance checks by VLA to be conducted in an effective manner.
https://handbook.vla.vic.gov.au/han...s/notes-on-trials-in-county-or-supreme-courts