DOCSLIB.ORG

Adelaide Law Review 2014 Vol 35 No 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Adelaide Law Review 2014 Vol 35 No 2 Adelaide Adelaide Law Law Review Review 2014 2014 Adelaide Law Review 2014 TABLETABLE OFOF CONTENTSCONTENTS ARTICLES THEHaroldTHE 2011 2011 H JOHNBruff JOHN BRAY BRAYThe ORATION ORATION President and Congress: Separation of Powers in the United States of America 205 DavidLukDavide Irvine BeckIrvine TheFrFr eeEstabeedomdomlishment and and Security: Security: Clause Maintaining Maintaining of the Australian The The Balance Balance 295295 Constitution: Three Propositions and a Case Study 225 ARTICLESJonathanARTICLES Crowe Coherence and Acceptance in International Law: Can THETHE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OFOF ADELAIDEADELAIDE JamesJames Allan Allan and and HumanitarianismTimeTime and and Chance Chance and and and Humanthe the Prevailing Prevailing Rights Orthodoxy Orthodoxybe Reconciled in in ? 251 ADELAIDEADELAIDE LAWLAW REVIEWREVIEW AnthonySandraAnthony PruimSenanayake Senanayake EthnocideLegalLegal Academia Academia and Indigenous Happeneth Happeneth P eoples:to to Them Them Article All All — — A 8A ofStudy Study the Declarationofof the the Top Top Law onLaw the Journals Journals Rights of of of Australia Australia Indigenous and and New PeoplesNew Ze Zealandaland 269307307 ASSOCIATIONASSOCIATION Peter Devonshire Indigenous Students at Law School: Comparative LaurentiaLaurentia Mc McKessarKessar PerspectivesThreeThree Constitutional Constitutional Themes Themes in in the the High High Court Court 309 Jennifer Anderson Juvofofenile Australia: Australia: Courts 1 1 September –September An Australian 2008–19 2008–19 Innovation? June June 2 2010100 331347347 Elizabeth Wren and ‘Guilty, Your Honour’: Recent Legislative Developments ThanujaLoranaThanuja Rodrigo BartelsRodrigo onUnconscionable Unconscionablethe Guilty Plea Demands Demands Discount Under Under and anOn-Demand On-Demand Australian Guarant Guarant Capitaleeee s:s: TerritoryAA Case Case of Caseof Wrongful Wrongful Study ExploitationE onExploitationxploitationxploitation its Operation 361361361 ADELAIDEADELAIDE Michael Duffy Towards better disclosure of corporate risk – a look NicolaNicola McGarrity, McGarrity, SunsetSunset Clauses Clauses in in Australian Australian Anti-Terror Anti-Terror Laws Laws 399399 at risk disclosure in periodic reporting 385 RishiRishi Gulati Gulati and and LAWLAW REVIEWREVIEW GeorgeREVIEWGeorge Williams Williams ESSAYS John Gava What We Know About Contract Law and Transacting MatthewMatthew Groves Groves in ThetheThe MarketplaceHardiman Hardiman Rule Rule — A Review Essay of Catherine 427427 Mitchell, Contract Law and Contract Law Practice: IanIan Murray Murray BridgingTravelTravel to tothe Invigorate Invigorate Gap Between the the Mind Mind Legal and and Reasoningthe the Wallet: Wallet: and CommercialDoDo the the In Intete rnationalExpectationrnational Tax Tax Rules andRules Jonathan Appropriately Appropriately Morgan, ContractEncourageEncourage Law United United Minimalism: States–Australian States–Australian A Formalist Academic Academic Restatement Visits? Visits? 455455 of Commercial Contract Law 409 GeoffreyPGeoffreyeter Burdon, Lindell Lindell ReflectingInIn Defence Defence on of of The TheHannah High HighArendt Court Court and— — Its ItsEichmann Role Role as as an an Gabrielle Appleby, in AgentJAgenterusalem: of of Constitutional Constitutional A Report on Change Change the Banality of Evil 427505505 Rebecca LaForgia, JoyceJoeJoyce McIntyre Chi Chi and and and Doing Doing BBusiness Businessusiness to to do do Good: Good: MirandaNgaireMiranda Naffine StewartS Stewarttewart 537537 CASECASE NOTES NOTESNOTES Prudence Buckland Honeysett v The Queen (2014) 311 ALR 320: RichardRichard Sletvold Sletvold PGAPGA V V The The Queen: Queen: Do Do Laws Laws Just Just Disappear? Disappear? 573573 Opinion Evidence and Reliability: A Sticking Point 449 BOOKJeromeBOOK REVIEW REVIEWSquires Google Spain SL v Agencia Española De Protección De Datos (European Court Of Justice, C-131/12, PePeteterr Burdon Burdon 13Property PropertyMay 2014) Rights Rights and and Sustainability: Sustainability: The The Evolution Evolution 463 ofof Property Property Rights Rights to to Meet Meet Eco Ecolologicalgical Challenges Challenges 581581 Vol Vol 35 35 Vol 35 BOOK REVIEWS SUBMISSIONMarSUBMISSIONgaret White OF OF MA MANUSCRIPTSNUSCRIPTSJurisprudence as Practical Reason: A Celebration 586586 of the Collected Essays of John Finnis Edited by VOLUMEVOLUME 3535 NUMBERNUMBER 22 Mark Sayers and Aladin Rahemtula 473 No No 2 2 No 2 AdelaideAdelaide Law Law Review Review Association Association AdelaideAdelaide Law Law School School TheThe University University of of Adelaide Adelaide AdelaideAdelaide SASA 50055005 AUSTRALIAAUSTRALIA ADVISORY BOARD Emeritus Professor W R Cornish Emeritus Herchel Smith Professor of Intellectual Property Law University of Cambridge United Kingdom Professor J R Crawford Whewell Professor of International Law University of Cambridge United Kingdom Emeritus Professor M J Detmold Adelaide Law School The University of Adelaide South Australia The Hon Professor J J Doyle Former Chief Justice Supreme Court of South Australia Emeritus Professor R Graycar Sydney Law School The University of Sydney New South Wales Professor J V Orth William Rand Kenan Jr Professor of Law The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill United States of America Emeritus Professor I Shearer Sydney Law School The University of Sydney New South Wales Professor J M Williams Adelaide Law School The University of Adelaide South Australia ADELAIDE LAW REVIEW Editors Gabrielle Appleby Paul Babie John Gava Book Review Editor Gabrielle Appleby Senior Student Editors Emily Bell Seb Tonkin Student Editors Prudence Buckland Laira Krieg Alexander Chan Jordan Phoustanis Sophie Flaherty Holly Ritson Samantha Graham Jerome Squires Mark Hautop Alyse Walter Publications Officer Panita Hirunboot Volume 35 Issue 2 2014 The Adelaide Law Review is a refereed journal that is published twice a year by the Adelaide Law Review Association of the Adelaide Law School, The University of Adelaide. A guide for the submission of manuscripts is set out at the back of this issue. Articles and other contributions for possible publication are welcomed. Copies of the journal may be purchased, or a subscription obtained, from: Administrative Officer For North America: Adelaide Law Review Association William S Hein & Co Adelaide Law School 1285 Main Street The University of Adelaide Buffalo NY 14209 South Australia 5005 USA AUSTRALIA e-mail: <[email protected]> <http://www.adelaide.edu.au/press/journals/law-review> This volume may be cited as: (2014) 35 Adelaide Law Review The articles in this volume are published in 2014. ISSN 0065-1915 © Copyright is vested in the Association and, in relation to each article, in its author, 2014. TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLES Harold H Bruff The President and Congress: Separation of Pow ers in the United States of America 205 Luke Beck The Establishment Clause of the Australian Constitution: Three Propositions and a Case Study 225 Jonathan Crowe Coherence and Acceptance in International Law: Can Humanitarianism and Human Rights be Reconciled? 251 Sandra Pruim Ethnocide and Indigenous Peoples: Article 8 of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 269 Peter Devonshire Indigenous Students at Law School: Comparative Perspectives 309 Jennifer Anderson Juvenile Courts – An Australian Innovation? 331 Elizabeth Wren and ‘Guilty, Your Honour’: Recent Legislative Developments Lorana Bartels on the Guilty Plea Discount and an Australian Capital Territor y Case Study on its Operation 361 Michael Duffy Towards better disclosure of corporate risk – a look at risk disclosure in periodic reporting 385 REVIEW ESSAYS John Gava What We Know About Contract Law and Transacting in the Marketplace — A Review Essay of Catherine Mitchell, Contract Law and Contract Law Practice: Bridging the Gap Between Legal Reasoning and Commercial Expectation and Jonathan Morgan, Contract Law Minimalism: A Formalist Restatement of Commercial Contract Law 409 Peter Burdon, Reflecting on Hannah Arendt and Eichmann Gabrielle Appleby, in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil 427 Rebecca LaForgia, Joe McIntyre and Ngaire Naffine CASE NOTES Prudence Buckland Honeysett v The Queen (2014) 311 ALR 320: Opinion Evidence and Reliability: A Sticking Point 449 Jerome Squires Google Spain SL v Agencia Española De Protección De Datos (European Court Of Justice, C-131/12, 13 May 2014) 463 BOOK REVIEWS Margaret White Jurisprudence as Practical Reason: A Celebration of the Collected Essays of John Finnis Edited by Mark Sayers and Aladin Rahemtula 473 Harold H Bruff* THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS: SEPARATION OF POWERS IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ABSTRACT Although the framers of the Australian Constitution adopted many features of the United States Constitution, they rejected the separation of legislative and executive power in favour of responsible government in a parliamentary system like that of the United Kingdom. In doing so, Australians depended on existing conventions about the nature of respon- sible government instead of specification of its attributes in constitutional text. The United States Constitution contains detailed provisions about separation of powers, but unwritten conventions have produced some central features of American government. This article reviews conven- tions developed by Congress that constrain Presidents in the domestic sphere with regard to the appointment of executive and judicial officers and the funding of the federal government. The article then reviews conventions
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Monash Law School Annual Report 2011
    Law Annual Report 2011 Monash Law School Australia n China n India n Italy n Malaysia n South Africa www.law.monash.edu Contents 1. Introduction to Monash Law School .............................2 9. Law School Activities ...................................................37 9.1 Events .......................................................................................... 37 2. Campuses.......................................................................3 9.2 Public Lectures ............................................................................ 38 2.1 Clayton ........................................................................................... 3 9.3 Book Launches ............................................................................ 40 2.2 Monash University Law Chambers................................................. 3 9.4 Media Involvement ....................................................................... 40 2.3 Monash Education Centre, Prato, Italy ........................................... 3 2.4 Sunway, Malaysia ........................................................................... 3 10. Advancement .............................................................. 41 10.1 Advancement ..............................................................................41 3. Research ........................................................................4 10.2 Monash Law School Foundation Board ......................................41 3.1 Reflections on Research During 2011 ............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Current Legal Issues Seminar Series 2012 Current Legal Issues Seminar Series 2012
    CURRENT LEGAL ISSUES SEMINAR SERIES 2012 CURRENT LEGAL ISSUES SEMINAR SERIES 2012 We are pleased to announce the fourth annual Current Legal Issues Seminar Series for 2012. The series seeks to bring together leading scholars, practitioners and members of the Judiciary in Queensland and from abroad to discuss key issues of contemporary legal significance. Session 1 An action for (serious) invasions of privacy Date: Thursday 7 June 2012 Venue: Banco Court, Supreme Court of Queensland, George Street, Brisbane Speaker: Professor Barbara McDonald, University of Sydney Bruce McClintock S.C., Barrister-at-Law Commentators: Patrick McCafferty, Barrister-at-Law Chair: The Hon Justice Applegarth, Supreme Court of Queensland Overview: Prompted by scandals more from abroad than at home, Australia may be on the cusp of adopting a statutory action for invasions of privacy. Many questions arise, with such an action having potentially wide-ranging ramifications, some beneficial, some not so, for the media and for individual citizens. Can these ramifications be confined by the drafting process? What advantages, other than speed, would a statutory action have over the incremental development of the common law? Can a statutory action more easily resolve the difficult balancing process that must always arise between rights to privacy and the public interest in freedom of speech, both in interlocutory relief and final orders? How does protection of privacy as an interest or right compare with the protection our law provides in other contexts, such as freedom from personal injury or damage to reputation? Depending on the progress of statutory reform at the time, this paper will consider the state of actual and proposed protection from invasions of privacy in Australia, with reference to typical situations, and include comparative perspectives from other jurisdictions grappling with similar issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2017
    7 I • I The Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration Incorporated Annual Report 201 for the year ended 30 June 2017 PATRONS The Hon Robert French AC His Honour Judge Peter Johnstone Chief Justice of Australia (until February 2017) Children’s Court of New South Wales The Hon Susan Kiefel AC The Hon Justice Susan Kenny Chief Justice of Australia (from February 2017) Federal Court of Australia The Rt Hon Dame Sian Elias GNZM The Hon Justice Duncan Kerr Chev LH Chief Justice of New Zealand Federal Court of Australia COUNCIL Mr Adam Kimber SC President Director of Public Prosecutions, South Australia The Hon Justice Robert Mazza Supreme Court of Western Australia Professor Kathy Mack Flinders University, South Australia Deputy President/President Elect The Hon Justice Bob Gotterson AO Mr Greg Manning Court of Appeal, Queensland Attorney-General’s Department, Canberra Deputy President His Honour Judge Nicholoas Manousaridis Mr Laurie Glanfield AM Federal Circuit Court of Australia New South Wales Mr Dan O’Gorman SC Members Barrister, Queensland The Hon Justice Murray Aldridge Family Court of Australia Deputy Chief Magistrate Jelena Popovic Magistrates’ Court, Victoria Mr Iain Anderson Attorney General’s Department, ACT The Hon Justice Steven Rares Federal Court of Australia Justice Jenny Blokland Supreme Court of the Northern Territory The Hon Justice Richard Refshauge Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory Hon Justice Malcolm Blue Supreme Court of South Australia Ms Jane Reynolds Family Court of Australia and Federal Court
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 40 1.Indb
    FOREWORD PROFESSOR BRYAN HORRIGAN* In early 1964, the fi rst law students attended their fi rst law lecture, given by the Foundation Dean, Professor David Derham, at the newly established law school at Monash University. Fifty years later, in mid-2014, Prime Minister Tony Abbott delivered a video-taped message to a crowd of more than 400 students, staff, and alumni gathered together in Melbourne to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the foundation of the Faculty of Law at Monash University. In particular, this 50th anniversary dinner celebrated fi ve decades of students passing through the doors of the David Derham Law School Building. The prime minister’s message of congratulations on that occasion is worth recording for posterity in this special 50th anniversary edition of the Monash University Law Review. Prime Minister Abbott told the audience, ‘I send my very best wishes to everyone celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Monash University Faculty of Law [and] I pay particular tribute to your history of achievement in becoming one of our country’s most respected law schools’. He added that ‘you have laid the foundation for your students to excel and to strengthen our country’, noting that ‘members of my own team … started out as law students at Monash University’. Almost 40 years after the doors of the Faculty of Law fi rst opened, the fi rst external academic review of the Faculty concluded that ‘[a]ll the best aspects of the Monash Law School must be celebrated’ and ‘[t]he Faculty has sustained a reputation for quality and innovation for nearly four decades’.1 More than a decade after that external review, the assessment of the Faculty by historians and co-authors, Peter Yule and Fay Woodhouse, in Pericleans, Plumbers and Practitioners: The First Fifty Years of the Monash University Law Schooll (Monash University Publishing, 2014), is that ‘Monash law school is at a high point as it celebrates its fi ftieth anniversary, but it will require continual innovation, reinvention and fl exibility if it is to maintain that position until its centenary and beyond’.
    [Show full text]
  • Council of Australian Law Deans
    Council of Australian Law Deans Meeting 2007#3 University of Western Australia, Perth 22 & 23 September 2007 DRAFT MINUTES CALD Draft Minutes, Meeting 2007#3 – University of Western Australia, Perth – 22 & 23 September 2007 ATTENDANCE Present (22) Deans (14) Professor Michael Coper Australian National University Assoc Professor Mark Stoney Edith Cowan University Professor Paula Baron Griffith University Professor Gabriel Moens Murdoch University Professor The Hon Michael Lavarch Queensland University of Technology Professor Bee Chen Goh Southern Cross University Assoc Professor Rosemary Owens University of Adelaide (Acting) Professor Murray Raff University of Canberra Professor Michael Crommelin University of Melbourne Assoc Professor Jürgen Bröhmer University of New England Professor Michael Gillooly University of Notre Dame, Australia Professor Bill Ford University of Western Australia Professor Michael Adams University of Western Sydney Professor Luke McNamara University of Wollongong Deputising (4) Professor Patrick Keyzer Bond University Assoc Professor Matthew Storey Charles Darwin University Ms Mandy Shircore James Cook University Professor Vicki Waye University of South Australia In attendance (5) Mr Christopher Roper (by phone) Consultant Dr Susanne Owen Owen Educational Consulting Ms Jennifer Braid CALD Secretary Ms Karen Heuer PA to Dean Coper Ms Barbara Williamson PA to Dean Ford Apologies (16) Professor Duncan Bentley* Bond University* Mr Dennis Clark* Charles Darwin University* Professor Anne Rees Deakin University Assoc
    [Show full text]
  • Certification Status of Australian Law Schools As at 9 March 2020
    Certification status of Australian Law Schools as at 9 March 2020 Certification Law School Current Dean expiry date Australian Catholic University Professor Rocque Reynolds 8 March 2025 Dean of Law, Thomas More Law School, Faculty of Law and Business Australian National University Professor Sally Wheeler OBE MRIA FaCSS 28 February 2022 Dean, ANU College of Law Bond University Professor Nick James 28 February 2022 Executive Dean, Faculty of Law CQUniversity Australia Professor Stephen Colbran 28 February 2022 Dean of Law, School of Business and Law Curtin University Professor Robert Cunningham 8 March 2025 Dean and Head, Curtin Law School, Faculty of Business and Law Deakin University Professor Jenni Lightowlers 28 February 2022 Dean, Deakin Law School, Faculty of Business and Law Edith Cowan University Associate Professor Joshua Aston 28 February 2022 Associate Dean (Law), School of Business and Law Flinders University Associate Professor Tania Leiman 28 February 2022 Dean of Law, College of Business, Government and Law Griffith University Associate Professor Therese Wilson 28 February 2022 Dean of Law and Head of School, Griffith Law School James Cook University Professor Elizabeth Spencer 28 February 2022 Head of Law, School of Law, College of Business, Law and Governance La Trobe University Professor Fiona Kelly 28 February 2022 Head of School, La Trobe Law School, College of Arts, Social Sciences and Commerce Accredited Australian Law Schools as at 9 March 2020 Page 1 Certification Law School Current Dean expiry date Macquarie University
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitution Makers
    Papers on Parliament No. 30 November 1997 The Constitution Makers _________________________________ Published and Printed by the Department of the Senate Parliament House, Canberra ISSN 1031–976X Published 1997 Papers on Parliament is edited and managed by the Research Section, Department of the Senate. Editors of this issue: Kathleen Dermody and Kay Walsh. All inquiries should be made to: The Director of Research Procedure Office Department of the Senate Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600 Telephone: (06) 277 3078 ISSN 1031–976X Cover design: Conroy + Donovan, Canberra Cover illustration: The federal badge, Town and Country Journal, 28 May 1898, p. 14. Contents 1. Towards Federation: the Role of the Smaller Colonies 1 The Hon. John Bannon 2. A Federal Commonwealth, an Australian Citizenship 19 Professor Stuart Macintyre 3. The Art of Consensus: Edmund Barton and the 1897 Federal Convention 33 Professor Geoffrey Bolton 4. Sir Richard Chaffey Baker—the Senate’s First Republican 49 Dr Mark McKenna 5. The High Court and the Founders: an Unfaithful Servant 63 Professor Greg Craven 6. The 1897 Federal Convention Election: a Success or Failure? 93 Dr Kathleen Dermody 7. Federation Through the Eyes of a South Australian Model Parliament 121 Derek Drinkwater iii Towards Federation: the Role of the Smaller Colonies Towards Federation: the Role of the Smaller Colonies* John Bannon s we approach the centenary of the establishment of our nation a number of fundamental Aquestions, not the least of which is whether we should become a republic, are under active debate. But after nearly one hundred years of experience there are some who believe that the most important question is whether our federal system is working and what changes if any should be made to it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitution Makers
    The 1897 Federal Convention Election: a Success or Failure? The 1897 Federal Convention Election: a Success or Failure?* Kathleen Dermody Federation for years past had been like a water-logged hulk; it could not make headway, but it still lay in the offing, watching and longing for the pilot and the tug. The people are the tug, to fetch it into the harbour of victory.1 Federation—a Question for the People hroughout the early 1890s politicians used federation as a plaything, picking it up and Tputting it down according to political whim and personal ambition: the people, tired with such toying, shrugged their shoulders at the prospect of Australian union and turned their attention elsewhere. To give the movement vigour, the friends of federation constantly referred to the need to involve the people. This paper will look at the popular election of delegates from New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania to the Australasian Federal Convention of 1897–98 and the attempts made during the campaign to arouse people to the importance of federation. The Western Australian Parliament decided that members of Parliament, not the people, would have the responsibility for electing delegates to the convention and so Western Australia is not considered in this paper; nor is Queensland which shunned the Convention. One of the main reasons for opening the doors of the 1891 federal convention to the public was the desire of the delegates to win over the confidence of the people and to cultivate their sympathies for federation. This convention, consisting of delegates appointed by the Parliament of each of the six Australian colonies and New Zealand, succeeded in adopting a draft constitution in the form of a Draft of a Bill to Constitute the Commonwealth of * Dr Kathleen Dermody is a Principal Research Officer in the Committee Office of the Senate.
    [Show full text]
  • CALD Meeting Papers
    CALD Meeting Papers A meeting of the Council of Australian Law Deans will be hosted by the School of Business and Law at Edith Cowan University on Friday 4 October 2019 between 9.15am and 4.00pm as follows: Venue: Council Chambers, Building 1, Level 4, Room 1.447 Edith Cowan University 270 Joondalup Drive, JOONDALUP WA 6027 (refer campus map on page 3) ECU Contacts: Kaye Bell (08) 6304 5046 | [email protected] / [email protected] Holly Johnson (08) 6304 5304 | 0481 900 868 | [email protected] CALD Chair: Professor Lesley Hitchens, Dean, Faculty of Law, University of Technology Sydney Deans/Heads of School (or nominees) in attendance from the following Law Schools: Australian Catholic University, Professor Rocque Reynolds, Dean of Law, Thomas More Law School Australian National University, Associate Professor Vivien Holmes, Associate Dean (Education), ANU College of Law (for Professor Sally Wheeler) Bond University, Professor Nick James, Executive Dean, Faculty of Law Charles Darwin University, Associate Professor Alan Berman, Dean of Law, College of Business and Law Charles Sturt University, Associate Professor Alison Gerard, Director, Centre for Law and Justice CQUniversity Australia, Professor Stephen Colbran, Head (Discipline of Law), School of Business and Law Curtin University, Professor Robert Cunningham, Dean and Head of School, Curtin Law School Deakin University, Professor Matthew Groves, Deakin Law School (for Professor Jenni Lightowlers) Edith Cowan University, Associate Professor Joshua Aston, Associate Dean (Law),
    [Show full text]
  • [Attachment 1] COUNCIL of AUSTRALIAN LAW DEANS Notes for the Development of a Business Plan for 2007-2008
    Council of Australian Law Deans Meeting 2006#3 Queensland University of Technology Faculty of Law Brisbane 30 & 31 October 2006 MINUTES CALD Minutes, Meeting 2006#3 – QUT, Brisbane – 30 & 31 October 2006 Council of Australian Law Deans Meeting 2006#3 Faculty of Law, QUT, 30 & 31 October 2006 MINUTES Present Deans (16) Professor Michael Coper Australian National University Professor Duncan Bentley Bond University Professor Gary Davis Flinders University Professor Rob McQueen Griffith University Professor Paul Havemann James Cook University Professor Hon Michael Lavarch Queensland University of Technology Professor Bee Chen Goh Southern Cross University Professor Paul Fairall University of Adelaide Professor Murray Raff University of Canberra Professor Michael Crommelin University of Melbourne Professor Stephen Colbran University of New England Professor David Dixon University of New South Wales Professor Jill McKeough University of Technology Sydney Professor Bill Ford University of Western Australia Professor Carolyn Sappideen University of Western Sydney Professor Stuart Kaye University of Wollongong Deputising (5) Professor Rafiq Islam Macquarie University Professor HP Lee Monash University Dr Vernon Nase Murdoch University Professor Patrick Parkinson University of Sydney Professor Neil Andrews Victoria University In attendance (5) Ms Jennifer Braid CALD Secretary Ms Karen Heuer PA to Dean Coper Ms Allayne Webster PA to Dean Fairall Mr Christopher Lee ILSAC Secretariat Mr Christopher Roper Consultant (31 October) Apologies (13) Mr Dennis
    [Show full text]
  • 17Th ASLI Conference 2020 – 3 & 4 June 2020
    17th ASLI Conference 2020 – 3 & 4 June 2020 Name of Author : Francis SL Wang (Convener) – Speaker 1 Designation / Academic Post : Part-Time Professor Institution / Organisation : International Association of Law Schools Panel Category : Legal Education Panel Title : Sense and Sensitivity II: Rational Legal Discourse on Sensitive, Challenging and Controversial Subjects – Conflicting Western and Asian Approaches in Defining the Meaning of the Rule of Law. Participation Type : Panel Submission – P1 This paper continues the initial work presented at the 2019 ASLI Annual Meeting – “Sense and Sensibility: Teaching Sensitive, Challenging and Controversial Subjects”. The collaborators shall continue the exploration of teaching and researching Sensitive, Challenging and Controversial (SCC) topics in the context of legal education and the rule of law. The paper will contrast Western and East Asian foundational philosophic assumptions in shaping legal thinking. Sensitive, Challenging and Controversial (SCC) test the boundaries of belief, cultural imperatives, and definitions of the rule of law. The authors will discuss the results of student surveys in a variety of jurisdictions to consider potentially different attitudes among law students in different cultures. The paper will juxtapose various cultural Asian perspectives and contrast them with the currently accepted neoliberal democratic Western perspective that any issue is subject to full, open and unfettered freedom of speech and debate. That position is bolstered by the assertion that it would lead to better governance outcomes. This view is that all topics are amenable to rational debate. With the rise of Asian nations in wealth and political influence, this model is being challenged by a more tightly controlled discourse which privileges stability and conformity.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Kid on the Block: the Australian Centre for Justice Innovation
    Law Issue 2/12 News from the Monash Law School community Professor Bryan Horrigan New Dean of Monash Law Inside this issue: Feature: A new kid on the block: The Australian Centre for Justice Innovation www.law.monash.edu News from the Monash Law School community Inside: Dean’s message Feature: 2 The Australian Centre for Justice Innovation Supporting evidence based Professor Arie Freiberg, AM justice system reform Dean, Monash Law School By Tania Sourdin and Sandy Caspian This is my twentieth, and last, Dean’s Report, for Law Matters and it is my pleasure to welcome Professor Bryan Horrigan as the new dean of the Law School. Bryan came to Monash in 2009 to the position of the Louis Waller Chair in Law and has held the position of Associate Dean New Patron of (Research) during which he has been a valuable and active member of the Faculty’s Executive 5 Lucinda Lecture Committee, among other Faculty governing bodies and a leader of our research program. Series When I assumed the position of Dean in 2004 we After nearly 50 years Monash is well-known The Honourable Marilyn Warren, were preparing for the Faculty’s 40th anniversary nationally and internationally and with over 14,000 AC, QC, Chief Justice of the celebration and as I leave we are preparing for alumni flourishing and succeeding in the law, Supreme Court of Victoria, the golden anniversary in 2014. The celebrations business, the public service, the arts and in the non-government sector the Faculty continues to accepts role as new patron should be memorable and I look forward to participating in them as an alumnus of the Faculty.
    [Show full text]