{"title":"Just How Common is the Common Law? A Historical and Comparative Perspective","authors":"The Hon Susan Kiefel AC","doi":"10.53300/001c.11471","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.11471","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43538197","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
National uniform legislation links the federal distribution of powers achieved more than 117 years ago to the challenges and opportunities faced by Australia in an interconnected world. Over this span of time, varying and at times contradicting classifications of structures of this complex legislation have been offered. This article, firstly, examines a variety of existing classifications and, secondly, provides an analysis of national uniform legislation from the list prepared by the Parliamentary Counsel's Committee comprising 84 sets of uniform Acts. The purpose of this examination is to provide a synthesis of an accurate classification for today. The findings indicate the predominance of three primary structures: referred, applied and mirror. The article proposes to use classification of national uniform legislation constrained to these three primary structures; this approach contributes by diminishing ambiguity and complexity surrounding the development and drafting national uniform legislation. The article offers a classification figure that accommodates variations between previous classifications and streamlines the current understanding. This figure can serve as a practical evaluation tool for policymakers, legislative drafters and legal practitioners when working through inherent ambiguity and complexity surrounding national uniform legislation.
{"title":"Referred, Applied and Mirror Legislation as Primary Structures of National Uniform Legislation","authors":"Guzyal Hill","doi":"10.53300/001c.10865","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.10865","url":null,"abstract":"National uniform legislation links the federal distribution of powers achieved more than 117 years ago to the challenges and opportunities faced by Australia in an interconnected world. Over this span of time, varying and at times contradicting classifications of structures of this complex legislation have been offered. This article, firstly, examines a variety of existing classifications and, secondly, provides an analysis of national uniform legislation from the list prepared by the Parliamentary Counsel's Committee comprising 84 sets of uniform Acts. The purpose of this examination is to provide a synthesis of an accurate classification for today. The findings indicate the predominance of three primary structures: referred, applied and mirror. The article proposes to use classification of national uniform legislation constrained to these three primary structures; this approach contributes by diminishing ambiguity and complexity surrounding the development and drafting national uniform legislation. The article offers a classification figure that accommodates variations between previous classifications and streamlines the current understanding. This figure can serve as a practical evaluation tool for policymakers, legislative drafters and legal practitioners when working through inherent ambiguity and complexity surrounding national uniform legislation.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44337073","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article comprises the first detailed legal analysis of nudity on the Australian beach. It provides an overview of the formal law around public nudity on Australian beaches and unpacks both the cultural significance and practical operation of regulation within this context. It begins by demonstrating how the Australian beach is a particularly dense nexus of cultural meaning and significance, within which general cultural anxieties about public nudity are amplified. It then sets out the formal legal apparatus that performs the regulatory work that responds to these anxieties, including State/Territory offences relating to public exposure, public behaviour and bathing dress. However, the law ‘in the books’ about beach nudity diverges in significant ways from the law ‘in action’, and this analysis unpacks the practical side of the law of the Australian beach in terms of policing discretion, the application of legal standards of decency and propriety, and social patterns of nude beach use. The formal designation of certain spaces by some States/Territories as ‘free beaches’— where it is not against the law to be nude — is argued to constitute the symbolic containment, rather than endorsement, of public nudity.
{"title":"Clothing Optional?: Nudity and the Law of the Australian Beach","authors":"Theodore Bennett","doi":"10.53300/001c.10864","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.10864","url":null,"abstract":"This article comprises the first detailed legal analysis of nudity on the Australian beach. It provides an overview of the formal law around public nudity on Australian beaches and unpacks both the cultural significance and practical operation of regulation within this context. It begins by demonstrating how the Australian beach is a particularly dense nexus of cultural meaning and significance, within which general cultural anxieties about public nudity are amplified. It then sets out the formal legal apparatus that performs the regulatory work that responds to these anxieties, including State/Territory offences relating to public exposure, public behaviour and bathing dress. However, the law ‘in the books’ about beach nudity diverges in significant ways from the law ‘in action’, and this analysis unpacks the practical side of the law of the Australian beach in terms of policing discretion, the application of legal standards of decency and propriety, and social patterns of nude beach use. The formal designation of certain spaces by some States/Territories as ‘free beaches’— where it is not against the law to be nude — is argued to constitute the symbolic containment, rather than endorsement, of public nudity.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48158016","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nina Funnell, Bri Lee, Saxon Mullins, J. Crowe, Nick James
Studies show that one in five Australian women has been sexually assaulted in her lifetime. How well does our criminal justice system deal with this problem? Three prominent survivors of sexual violence—Nina Funnell, Bri Lee and Saxon Mullins—shared their experiences with the legal system at a panel discussion hosted by the Faculty of Law at Bond University on 6 June 2019. The panellists discussed the three main stages in the process—police, prosecutions and the courts—and reflected upon the challenges they encountered in their cases, as well as offering suggestions for reform. The panel was chaired by Professor Jonathan Crowe of Bond University and introduced by Professor Nick James, Executive Dean of the Faculty of Law. This is an edited transcript of the discussion.
{"title":"Survivors Speak: How the Criminal Justice System Responds to Sexual Violence","authors":"Nina Funnell, Bri Lee, Saxon Mullins, J. Crowe, Nick James","doi":"10.53300/001c.10357","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.10357","url":null,"abstract":"Studies show that one in five Australian women has been sexually assaulted in her lifetime. How well does our criminal justice system deal with this problem? Three prominent survivors of sexual violence—Nina Funnell, Bri Lee and Saxon Mullins—shared their experiences with the legal system at a panel discussion hosted by the Faculty of Law at Bond University on 6 June 2019. The panellists discussed the three main stages in the process—police, prosecutions and the courts—and reflected upon the challenges they encountered in their cases, as well as offering suggestions for reform. The panel was chaired by Professor Jonathan Crowe of Bond University and introduced by Professor Nick James, Executive Dean of the Faculty of Law. This is an edited transcript of the discussion.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43429527","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Problem of Applying Foreign Law under Section 44(i) of the Constitution","authors":"Kyriaco Nikias","doi":"10.53300/001c.7722","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.7722","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46093665","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It is now over a year since the declaration of the Uluru Statement From the Heart (the ‘Uluru Statement’). Following an exhaustive series of dialogues with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community throughout Australia, the Uluru Statement offers an Indigenous-led legal, political, and cultural solution for bringing together Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians within our system of governance. Its three pillars are Voice, treaty, and truth-telling. In this comment we provide an overview of the Uluru Statement and its importance in Australia’s legal landscape. We do so as a background to our key contention that the Uluru Statement is a central pillar in a truly pluralistic Australian public law. Regardless of its political reception — at the time of writing the Australian government has rejected it out of hand — the Uluru Statement represents a milestone of Australian law offering a vital opportunity to integrate Indigenous law into an otherwise settler legal system.
{"title":"Uluru Statement from the Heart: Australian Public Law Pluralism","authors":"Dani Larkin, K. Galloway","doi":"10.53300/001c.6796","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.6796","url":null,"abstract":"It is now over a year since the declaration of the Uluru Statement From the Heart (the ‘Uluru Statement’). Following an exhaustive series of dialogues with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community throughout Australia, the Uluru Statement offers an Indigenous-led legal, political, and cultural solution for bringing together Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians within our system of governance. Its three pillars are Voice, treaty, and truth-telling.\u0000In this comment we provide an overview of the Uluru Statement and its importance in Australia’s legal landscape. We do so as a background to our key contention that the Uluru Statement is a central pillar in a truly pluralistic Australian public law. Regardless of its political reception — at the time of writing the Australian government has rejected it out of hand — the Uluru Statement represents a milestone of Australian law offering a vital opportunity to integrate Indigenous law into an otherwise settler legal system.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44566289","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article considers new challenges that potentially confront designers of contract-law syllabi in Australia, particularly in relation to assisting formative learners of the law to organize their conceptual knowledge of various factors or events that might work to ‘vitiate’ a contractual relationship apparently formed at law. Having recently prepared a new contract-law subject incorporating ‘vitiating factors’ within its purview, the authors describe the approach that they took to the design and presentation of that particular component of the course. Many, if not most, of the factors were presented as responding to particular (and quite familiar) forms of pre-contractual bargaining behaviour that subject an otherwise rational jural agent to an improper reason for intentional entry into a lawful contract. None of the vitiating factors, the authors decided, could be adequately explained in terms of single-party ‘defective consent’ alone. But no sooner had the new course been delivered than the High Court released its decision in Thorne v Kennedy. The majority of the judgments in that case immediately rendered descriptively inadequate at least part of the conceptual account that the authors had built for their learners in the subject. This article describes how that occurred and what ramifications might follow for the design and delivery of contract-law courses in Australia in the future, at least in relation to so-called ‘vitiating factors’.
{"title":"Teaching Contract Vitiation in Australia: New Challenges in Subject Design","authors":"R. Bigwood, R. Mullins","doi":"10.53300/001c.6797","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.6797","url":null,"abstract":"This article considers new challenges that potentially confront designers of contract-law syllabi in Australia, particularly in relation to assisting formative learners of the law to organize their conceptual knowledge of various factors or events that might work to ‘vitiate’ a contractual relationship apparently formed at law. Having recently prepared a new contract-law subject incorporating ‘vitiating factors’ within its purview, the authors describe the approach that they took to the design and presentation of that particular component of the course. Many, if not most, of the factors were presented as responding to particular (and quite familiar) forms of pre-contractual bargaining behaviour that subject an otherwise rational jural agent to an improper reason for intentional entry into a lawful contract. None of the vitiating factors, the authors decided, could be adequately explained in terms of single-party ‘defective consent’ alone. But no sooner had the new course been delivered than the High Court released its decision in Thorne v Kennedy. The majority of the judgments in that case immediately rendered descriptively inadequate at least part of the conceptual account that the authors had built for their learners in the subject. This article describes how that occurred and what ramifications might follow for the design and delivery of contract-law courses in Australia in the future, at least in relation to so-called ‘vitiating factors’.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46497410","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：