DOCSLIB.ORG

Provocation: Stage 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Provocation: Stage 1 Report April 2017 South Australian Law Reform Institute The Provoking Operation of Provocation: Stage 1 The South Australian Law Reform Institute was established in December 2010 by agreement between the Attorney-General of South Australia, the University of Adelaide and the Law Society of South Australia. It is based at the Adelaide University Law School. Postal address: SA Law Reform Institute Adelaide Law School University of Adelaide North Terrace Australia 5005 Telephone: (08) 8313 5582 Email: [email protected] Website: http://law.adelaide.edu.au/research/law-reform-institute Publications: SALRI publications, including this Report and the LGBTIQ Reports that preceded it, are available to download free of charge from the SALRI webpage under Publications: Reports and Papers. Suggested citation: David Plater, Lucy Line and Kate Fitz-Gibbon, The Provoking Operation of Provocation: Stage 1 (South Australian Law Reform Institute, Adelaide, 2017) Cover Illustration: The cover illustration is from: <http://willshub.com.au/sa-supreme-court-2/> Contents PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................................................................................................... V ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................................................ V ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................................................................ VI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... VII SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................ XIII PART 1 – INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 THE AUDIT REPORT ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 CONSULTATION PROCESS ................................................................................................................................. 2 1.4 SOME NOTES ON TERMINOLOGY ....................................................................................................................... 3 PART 2 – BALANCING RIGHTS AND SALRI’S TERMS OF REFERENCE ........................................................................ 5 PART 3 – THE LAW RELATING TO PROVOCATION ................................................................................................. 10 3.1 BRIEF HISTORY AND PURPOSE ......................................................................................................................... 10 3.2 LAW IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA ............................................................................................................................. 12 3.3 OTHER JURISDICTIONS ................................................................................................................................... 15 3.4 QUEENSLAND............................................................................................................................................... 16 PART 4 – CRITICISMS OF THE PROVOCATION DEFENCE GENERALLY ..................................................................... 19 4.1 AN OVERVIEW OF THE CRITICISMS OF PROVOCATION........................................................................................... 19 4.2 VICTIM BLAMING .......................................................................................................................................... 24 PART 5 – THE ‘GAY PANIC’ DEFENCE .................................................................................................................... 29 5.1 A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE HOMOSEXUAL ADVANCE DEFENCE ................................................................................. 29 5.2 GREEN V THE QUEEN .................................................................................................................................... 30 5.3 R V LINDSAY ................................................................................................................................................ 31 5.4 FIRST LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 34 5.5 CRITICISMS OF THE HOMOSEXUAL ADVANCE DEFENCE SPECIFICALLY ....................................................................... 37 5.6 EXCLUDING A NON-VIOLENT SEXUAL ADVANCE AS PROVOCATION ......................................................................... 40 PART 6 – GENDER BIAS AND PROVOCATION........................................................................................................ 44 6.1 PROVOCATION: A MAN’S LAW? ...................................................................................................................... 44 6.2 RESIDUAL PROVOCATION IN FAMILY VIOLENCE AND ELSEWHERE ............................................................................ 49 6.3 MARITAL COERCION ...................................................................................................................................... 51 6.4 KILLING FOR PRESERVATION IN AN ABUSIVE DOMESTIC RELATIONSHIP .................................................................... 54 PART 7 – ALTERNATIVE MODELS: PROVOCATION ................................................................................................ 56 7.1 ENGLAND .................................................................................................................................................... 56 7.2 NEW SOUTH WALES ..................................................................................................................................... 58 7.3 NSW MODEL: PROVOCATIVE CONDUCT AS A SERIOUS INDICTABLE OFFENCE ............................................................ 61 7.4 EXCLUDING A NON-VIOLENT SEXUAL ADVANCE AS PROVOCATION ......................................................................... 64 PART 8 – ISSUE OF SENTENCE .............................................................................................................................. 65 8.1 ISSUE FOR THE COURT AND ‘LABELS’ ................................................................................................................. 65 8.2 INTERACTION WITH MANDATORY SENTENCING ................................................................................................... 67 PART 9 – SELF-DEFENCE ....................................................................................................................................... 70 9.1 CRITICISMS OF THE CURRENT SOUTH AUSTRALIAN LAW OF SELF-DEFENCE ............................................................... 70 9.2 SELF-DEFENCE IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS ........................................................................................................... 73 Canada .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 73 New Zealand ............................................................................................................................................................................... 75 9.3 THE PARTIAL DEFENCE OF EXCESSIVE SELF-DEFENCE ........................................................................................... 77 iii 9.4 PROVIDING FOR VICTIMS OF FAMILY VIOLENCE – VICTORIA .................................................................................. 78 Self-defence as a Framework – Victoria ................................................................................................................................. 79 9.5 MODIFYING THE LAW OF SELF-DEFENCE IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA TO BETTER PROVIDE FOR THOSE WHO KILL IN RESPONSE TO FAMILY VIOLENCE .................................................................................................................................... 81 9.6 SOCIAL FRAMEWORK EVIDENCE ....................................................................................................................... 86 PART 10 – DURESS AND NECESSITY ..................................................................................................................... 91 PART 11 – DIMINISHED RESPONSIBILITY .............................................................................................................. 95 PART 12 – CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................................... 97 APPENDIX 1 – ROUNDTABLE REPORT – 11 MAY 2016 .............................................................................................. 100 APPENDIX 2 – ROUNDTABLE REPORT – 12 MAY 2016 ............................................................................................. 107 APPENDIX 3 – CRIMINAL LAW CONSOLIDATION ACT 1935 (SA) ............................................................................... 114 APPENDIX
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Equal Opportunity Commission Annual Report 2019-20 (PDF, 2.8
    SOUTH AUSTRALIAN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20 for Equal . Opportun.1ty In diversity we thrive To: The Hon Vickie Chapman MP Deputy Premier & Attorney-General This annual report is presented to Parliament to meet the statutory reporting requirements of the Public Sector Act 2009 (SA) and the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (SA) and meets the requirements of Premier and Cabinet Circular PC013 Annual Reporting. This report is verified to be accurate for the purposes of annual reporting to the Parliament of South Australia. Dr Niki Vincent Commissioner for Equal Opportunity 7 September 2020 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: Commissioner’s Overview of 2019-20 ............................................................... 8 Section 2: The role of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity....................................... 14 2.1. Functions of the Commissioner ....................................................................................14 2.2. Administration of Act and Ministerial direction ...........................................................15 2.3. Legislation administered by the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity .......................15 Section 3 Structure and funding of the Office ................................................................. 16 3.1 Core funding for the Commission ..................................................................................16 3.2. Executive employment in the Commission...................................................................18 3.3. Risks associated with the
    [Show full text]
  • Released Under Foi
    File 2018/15258/01 – Document 001 Applicant Name Applicant Type Summary All briefing minutes prepared for Ministers (and ministerial staff), the Premier (and staff) and/or Deputy Premier (and staff) in respect of the Riverbank precinct for the period 2010 to Vickie Chapman MP MP present Total patronage at Millswood Station, and Wayville Station (individually) for each day from 1 Corey Wingard MP October 30 November inclusive Copies of all documents held by DPTI regarding the proposal to shift a government agency to Steven Marshall MP Port Adelaide created from 2013 to present The total annual funding spent on the Recreation and Sport Traineeship Incentive Program Tim Whetstone MP and the number of students and employers utilising this program since its inception A copy of all reports or modelling for the establishment of an indoor multi‐sports facility in Tim Whetstone MP South Australia All traffic count and maintenance reports for timber hulled ferries along the River Murray in Tim Whetstone MP South Australia from 1 January 2011 to 1 June 2015 Corey Wingard MP Vision of rail car colliding with the catenary and the previous pass on the down track Rob Brokenshire MLC MP Speed limit on SE freeway during a time frame in September 2014 Request a copy of the final report/independent planning assessment undertaken into the Hills Face Zone. I believe the former Planning Minister, the Hon Paul Holloway MLC commissioned Steven Griffiths MP MP the report in 2010 All submissions and correspondence, from the 2013/14 and 2014/15 financial years
    [Show full text]
  • 22 October 2017 the Principal Research Officer Select Committee
    EOLC Sub 680 Rec'd 22/10/2017 22 October 2017 The Principal Research Officer Select Committee on End of Life Choices Legislative Assembly Parliament House PERTH WA 6000 Email [email protected] Dear Principal Research Officer RE WHY EUTHANASIA HAS NO PLACE IN AUSTRALIA WHY EUTHANASIA SUPPORTERS MUST FALL ON THEIR OWN SWORD WHY EUTHANASIA IN ANY OF ITS FORMS SHOULD NOT BE PERMITTED WHY EUTHANASIA MUST NOT SEE THE SUNSET ON THIS, THE LONGEST DAY My name is David Foletta. I am a solicitor admitted to practice in the State of New South Wales. MY SUBMISSIONS It is my pleasure to make submissions to the Inquiry into the need for laws in Western Australia to allow citizens to make informed decisions regarding their own end of life choices (Inquiry). MY POSITION ON EUTHANASIA I oppose all forms of euthanasia. EVANGELICALISM NOT THE ONLY REASON FOR OPPOSITION I hold to a Christian ethic, however, as the committee will see, I hold opposition for reasons that people who have a range of responses to questions of theology could also agree with. CONSENT TO PUBLICATION I give my consent to the public disclosure of this letter, the email serving this letter and all attachments to this letter. In my respectful submission, I actually consider that the public disclosure of the contents of my submissions is vital to the safeguarding of people in Western Australia and by consequence, all people around Australia. IN PERSON ATTENDANCE AT PUBLIC HEARING I am willing to travel to Western Australia to attend a public hearing in person.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ministry
    THE MINISTRY Previous portfolios merged New portfolio Minister into new portfolio • Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation • Minister for Defence and Space Industries Premier The Hon Steven Marshall MP • Minister for the Arts • Minister for Veterans’ Affairs • Minister for Multicultural Affairs • Minister for Justice Reform Deputy Premier; The Hon Vickie Chapman MP • Minister for Consumer and Business Attorney-General Affairs • Minister for Industrial Relations Treasurer The Hon Rob Lucas MLC • Minister for the Public Sector • Minister for Finance • Minister for Education and Child Development Education The Hon John Gardner MP • Minister for Higher Education and Skills - TAFE functions • Minister for Health Industries Trade, Tourism The Hon David Ridgway MLC • Minister for Tourism and Investment • Minister for Investment and Trade • Minister for Communities and Social Inclusion • Minister for Social Housing Human Services The Hon Michelle Lensink MLC • Minister for the Status of Women • Minister for Youth • Minister for Volunteers • Minister for Disabilities • Minister for Employment • Minister for Manufacturing and Innovation • Minister for Automotive Transformation • Minister for Science and Information Industry and The Hon David Pisoni MP Economy Skills • Minister for State Development • Minister for Small Business • Minister for Higher Education and Skills - Skills functions • Minister for Health Health and • Minister for Ageing The Hon Stephen Wade MLC Wellbeing • Minister for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Energy
    [Show full text]
  • Cabinet Ministers and Portfolio Responsibilities (PDF, 989.2
    THE MINISTRY The Hon Steven Marshall MP The Hon Vickie Chapman MP Premier of South Australia Deputy Premier | Attorney General | Planning and Local Government Responsible for: - Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation Responsible for: - Defence and Space Industries - Justice Reform - The Arts - Consumer and Business Affairs - Tourism - Local Government - Veterans’ Affairs - City of Adelaide - Multicultural Affairs The Hon Rob Lucas MLC The Hon Dan van Holst Pellekaan MP Treasurer Energy and Mining Responsible for: Responsible for: - Industrial Relations - Mineral Resources and Energy - The Public Sector - Leader of Government Business (HOA) - Finance - Housing and Urban Development - Leader of Government in the Legislative Council (LegCo) The Hon John Gardner MP The Hon Michelle Lensink MLC Education Human Services Responsible for: Responsible for: - Education and Child Development - Communities and Social Inclusion - Higher Education and Skills - TAFE - Social Housing functions - The Status of Women - Youth - Volunteers - Disabilities THE MINISTRY The Hon David Pisoni MP The Hon Stephen Wade MLC Innovation and Skills Health and Wellbeing Responsible for: Responsible for: - Workforce Training and Skills - Health - Innovation and Entrepreneurship - Ageing - Science and Information Economy - Mental Health and Substance Abuse - Apprenticeships and Traineeships - Creative Industries - Skilled Migration The Hon Rachel Sanderson MP The Hon Corey Wingard MP Child Protection Transport and Infrastructure | Recreation | Sport & Racing Responsible
    [Show full text]
  • August 2021 GREEK TRIBUNE - Μοbile: 04 0886 5004 - Email: [email protected]
    August 2021 GREEK TRIBUNE www.greektribune.com.au - Μοbile: 04 0886 5004 - Email: [email protected] AUSTRALIAN NEWS GREEK ON HALIFAX UN Security Council con- Owner not happy about testing delays demns Turkey’s illegalities The owner of the According to the ABC The Cyprus Government Turkish announcement to reopen fenced-off area of Varosha.” restaurant feared to be network, a patron at the appears to be satisfied by a part of Famagusta, an illegal CNA reported that delib- a super-spreader site function and a woman statement on Famagusta, adopt- move heavily criticised by the erations had been underway in South Australia’s lat- who worked there have ed by U.N. Security Council Greek Cypriots. between London and Nicosia and est COVID-19 outbreak both tested positive, but members on Friday, which con- Reports said earlier drafts writ- between London and Washington has raised concerns Mr Galantomos said demns recent announcements by ten by the British and circulated to after an earlier silence proce- about testing delays and his staff, who are con- Turkish president Erdogan and UNSC members did not include dure was broken by China, India communication break- sidered high-risk, have Turkish Cypriot leaders regarding reference to Turkey’s violations and Ireland, with the members downs, after finding been caught up in the the occupied city. and attracted strong criticisms by said to have requested “a certain out key details through long queues to get test- The Cyprus News Agency, member countries including India, amendment and for the state- the media and not from ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Married Women, Crime, and Questions of Liability in England, 1640-1760
    MARRIED WOMEN, CRIME, AND QUESTIONS OF LIABILITY IN ENGLAND, 1640-1760 by Marisha Christine Caswell A thesis submitted to the Department of History In conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Queen‟s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada February, 2012 Copyright ©Marisha Christine Caswell 2012 Abstract Upon marriage, women in early modern England became subject to the common law doctrine of coverture. Coverture had a number of consequences, all of which stemmed from a married woman‟s lack of independent legal identity. These consequences largely manifested themselves in a married woman‟s complete lack of property rights, but the lack of an independent legal identity created complications for assigning criminal responsibility to married women in the early modern criminal justice system. Coverture largely manifested itself in the criminal law through the defence of marital coercion, which held that a married woman who committed a crime – with the exceptions of murder and treason – was assumed to be acting under her husband‟s coercion and was therefore not liable for her actions. This study examines the perceptions, treatment, and experiences of married women in the northern assize circuit and London between 1640 and 1760, with particular attention to the defence of marital coercion. This thesis discovered that the household ideal, not the defence of marital coercion, was the most important factor in determining the perceptions, treatment, and experiences of married women with the criminal justice system. People in early modern England did not see coverture as the loss of rights, but rather the means through which to create a unified household.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bulletin Newsletter of the South Australian Voluntary Euthanasia Society Inc
    THE BULLETIN NEWSLETTER OF THE SOUTH AUSTRALIAN VOLUNTARY EUTHANASIA SOCIETY INC. (SAVES) Vol 28 No 1. ISSN 1321-0599 March 2011 ‘The right to die is as inviolable as the right to life’ Sir Mark Oliphant “Bill gets buried, … This issue even crosses the religious divide, with 85 per cent of people in a 2007 Newspoll but not dead yet” survey who indicated that they supported voluntary euthanasia identifying themselves as … So reports The Advertiser in an article (1) on Christian. I note that result with interest; it seems the failed Upper House attempt for voluntary that the vast majority of self-professed Christians euthanasia law reform under the Bill co-sponsored know very clearly where they stand on this issue, by Greens MLC, the Hon Mark Parnell, and the notwithstanding what religious leaders might be Hon Steph Key in the Lower House. Mr Parnell saying about it (2). spoke of his disappointment at the Bill’s defeat ‘on the voices’, but announced that it would The Hon Tammy Franks argued: be back on the agenda in the Upper House if Opponents often claim that it is impossible supported in the Lower House in 2011. to make a bill that will not be abused. That is equivalent to saying that there should not be road The public gallery of the Legislative Council speed limit laws because people might speed. was at full capacity with both supporters and The point of law is to spell out to our citizens opponents of the Bill witnessing another historic what is acceptable and, conversely, what will be SA debate on legislative change which lasted for prosecuted.
    [Show full text]
  • Strange Bedfellows: Criminal Law, Family Law, and the Legal Construction of Intimate Life Melissa Murray*
    Strange Bedfellows: Criminal Law, Family Law, and the Legal Construction of Intimate Life Melissa Murray* I. INTRO DUCTIO N ................................................................................... 1255 II. CRIME AND THE FAMILY: THE TRADITIONAL NARRATIVE ..................... 1258 III. THE PRIVATE LIFE OF CRIMINAL LAW .................................................. 1264 IV. STRANGE BEDFELLOWS: CRIMINAL LAW AND FAMILY LAW IN STATE V. K oso ...................................................................................................12 73 A . THE FACTS ................................................................................... 1275 B. REVEALING CRIMINAL LA WAND FAMILY LA W'S COOPERATIVE RE GULATION ................................................................................ 1277 C. PRODUCINGA BINARY VIEW OF INTIMATE LiE ................................. 1279 1. T he Prosecution ................................................................... 1279 * Assistant Professor of Law, U.C. Berkeley School of Law; J.D., Yale Law School; B.A., University of Virginia. This Article has benefited greatly from the generous suggestions and comments of more readers than I can thank here. I owe a special debt of gratitude to my colleagues at Berkeley Law School, and particularly to Kathy Abrams, Catherine Albiston, Michelle Anderson, Ian Haney-L6pez, Angela Harris, Oona Hathaway, Amy Kapczynski, Herma Hill Kay, Chris Kutz, Gillian Lester, David Lieberman, Goodwin Liu, Mary Ann Mason, Ali Miller, Erin Murphy, David Sklansky,
    [Show full text]
  • Victoria New South Wales
    Victoria Legislative Assembly – January Birthdays: - Ann Barker - Oakleigh - Colin Brooks – Bundoora - Judith Graley – Narre Warren South - Hon. Rob Hulls – Niddrie - Sharon Knight – Ballarat West - Tim McCurdy – Murray Vale - Elizabeth Miller – Bentleigh - Tim Pallas – Tarneit - Hon Bronwyn Pike – Melbourne - Robin Scott – Preston - Hon. Peter Walsh – Swan Hill Legislative Council - January Birthdays: - Candy Broad – Sunbury - Jenny Mikakos – Reservoir - Brian Lennox - Doncaster - Hon. Martin Pakula – Yarraville - Gayle Tierney – Geelong New South Wales Legislative Assembly: January Birthdays: - Hon. Carmel Tebbutt – Marrickville - Bruce Notley Smith – Coogee - Christopher Gulaptis – Terrigal - Hon. Andrew Stoner - Oxley Legislative Council: January Birthdays: - Hon. George Ajaka – Parliamentary Secretary - Charlie Lynn – Parliamentary Secretary - Hon. Gregory Pearce – Minister for Finance and Services and Minister for Illawarra South Australia Legislative Assembly January Birthdays: - Duncan McFetridge – Morphett - Hon. Mike Rann – Ramsay - Mary Thompson – Reynell - Hon. Carmel Zollo South Australian Legislative Council: No South Australian members have listed their birthdays on their website Federal January Birthdays: - Chris Bowen - McMahon, NSW - Hon. Bruce Bilson – Dunkley, VIC - Anna Burke – Chisholm, VIC - Joel Fitzgibbon – Hunter, NSW - Paul Fletcher – Bradfield , NSW - Natasha Griggs – Solomon, ACT - Graham Perrett - Moreton, QLD - Bernie Ripoll - Oxley, QLD - Daniel Tehan - Wannon, VIC - Maria Vamvakinou - Calwell, VIC - Sen.
    [Show full text]
  • DPC18/3376 GPO Box 2343 Adelaide SA 5001 DX 56201 12 September 2018 Tel 08 8226 3500 Fax 08 8226 3535
    DPC18/3376 GPO Box 2343 Adelaide SA 5001 DX 56201 12 September 2018 Tel 08 8226 3500 Fax 08 8226 3535 www.dpc.sa.gov.au Mr Peter Malinauskas Leader of the Opposition Parliament House North Terrace ADELAIDE SA 5000 Sent by email: [email protected] Dear Mr Malinauskas Freedom of information application I refer to your request received by the Office of the Premier seeking access under section 13 of the Freedom of Information Act 1991 (the Act) to: All documents relating to the monthly summary and statistics of television and radio interviews by Ministers and Shadow Ministers as prepared by the SA Government Media Monitoring Service between 17 March 2018 to 7 August 2018. The Department for the Premier and Cabinet (DPC) is responsible for providing determinations on behalf of the Office of the Premier and the purpose of this letter is to advise you of my determination. 8 documents were identified as answering the terms of your application and I have determined to release these documents as follows: I grant you access to 4 documents in full, copies of which are enclosed, and I grant you access to 4 documents in part, copies of which are also enclosed. Please refer to the schedule of documents attached, which, sets out my determination and reasons in full. Documents released in full Documents 1,3, 5 and 7 Documents released in part Documents 2, 4, 6 and 8 These documents contain information relating to the personal affairs of third parties. Under clause 6(1) of Schedule 1 to the Act, information is exempt if its disclosure would involve the ‘unreasonable disclosure of information concerning the personal affairs of any person’.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Liability Married Persons
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file, please contact us at NCJRS.gov. LAW REFORM COMMISSIONER Working Paper No. 2 , " .- .. t ~ I ' ~. ..~ '. ,.', .... \ i '. I . ~ ", 'c.': .;'!,.' ,J • : • '. " • CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF MARRIED PERSONS (Special Rules) MELBOURNE JANUARY 1975 ---------------- Views Expressed in this Working Paper are Provisional Only. Comment and criticism are invited and it would be much appreciated if these could be forwarded before 15th April, 1975. Address:- Law Reform Commissioner, 155 Queen Street, Melbourne, Vic. 3000. LAW REFORM COMMISSIONER Working Paper No.2 .- NCJRS ( , , MAV ~ 9 lQ]g ~~ j , ACGlU JstTIONS CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF MARRIED PERSONS (Special Rules) MELBOURNE JANUARY 1975 CONTENTS para. page [ntroduction 1 :; Part I The Defence of Marital Coercion 5 6 Part II Spouses as Accessories After the Fact 28 14 Part III Misprision of Felony 40 18 Part IV Receiving or Handling Stolen Goods 43 19 Part V Conspiracy Between Husband and Wife 52 22 Part VI Criminal Proceedings by One Spouse against the Other 73 31 3 WORKING PAPER NO. 2 CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF MARRIED PERSONS (Special Rules) INTRODUCTION 1. The functions of the Law Reform Commissioner, as defined by Section 8 (a) of the Law Reform Act 1973, include advising the Attorney-General on the modernisation of the law, having regard to the needs of the community. 2. The purpose of this Working Paper is to examine those special rules of law which in some cases relieve wives, and in other cases both husbands and wives, from criminal liability for conduct which would render them liable if they were unmarried. 3. Those rules originated long before the reforms of the law on the civil side which, during the past 100 years, have removed the legal disabilities of married women in matters of property, contract and family law, and long before those social changes which, in modern times, have reduced the discrimination to which women have been subjected in respect of education and economic opportunities.
    [Show full text]