Annual Report Annual

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Annual Report Annual Australian Law Reform Commission Annual Report 2013—14Australian ALRC www.alrc.gov.au 2013–14 121 R E P O R T 125 ALRC 125 ALRC Street Address: Level 40, 19 Martin Postal Address: Place GPO Box 3708 Te l (02) 8238 6333 Sydney NSW 2000 Sydney NSW 2001 Fax (02) 8238 6363 ANNUAL REPORT ALRC 2013–14 R E P O R T 125 ANNUAL REPORT Requests and inquiries regarding this report should be addressed to: The Executive Director Australian Law Reform Commission GPO Box 3708 Sydney NSW 2001 Telephone: (02) 8238 6333 Fax: (02) 8238 6363 Email: [email protected] Web: www.alrc.gov.au This report is also online at: www.alrc.gov.au/about/annual-reports ISBN 978-0-9924069-5-0 © Commonwealth of Australia 2014 This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in whole or part, subject to acknowledgement of the source, for your personal, non-commercial use or use within your organisation. Requests for further authorisation should be directed to the Australian Law Reform Commission. Printed by Ligare Pty Ltd ii Annual Report 2013–14 Professor Rosalind Croucher President Senator the Hon George Brandis QC Attorney-General Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 30 September 2014 Dear Attorney-General On behalf of the members of the Australian Law Reform Commission, I am pleased to present the Commission’s Annual Report for the period 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014. This report has been prepared in accordance with Part 8, s 57 of the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (Cth) and ss 63(2) and 70(2) of the Public Service Act 1999 (Cth). Yours sincerely Australian Law Reform Commission Level 40, MLC Centre, 19 Martin Place Tel (02) 8238 6333 Sydney NSW 2000 Fax (02) 8238 6363 Postal address: GPO Box 3708 Web www.alrc.gov.au Sydney NSW 2001 Email [email protected] iii Our vision A fair, equitable and accessible system of federal justice that contributes to a just and secure society. Outcome statement The ALRC is committed to achieving its vision through informed Government decisions about the development, reform and harmonisation of Australian laws and related processes through research, analysis, reports and community consultation and education. iv Annual Report 2013–14 Contents President’s overview 3 Corporate governance 37 Ministerial powers 37 Corporate overview Members of the Commission 37 Snapshot of 2013–14 10 Remuneration 42 Appointments and cessations 10 Policies 42 Significant events 10 Corporate planning 43 Publications 11 Financial management and audit 43 Performance 12 Fraud control and risk management 44 ALRC organisational structure 13 Enterprise risk management 44 Role and functions of the ALRC 14 Ethics 45 Report on performance Conflict of interest 45 Indemnity 46 Outcome and program structure 16 Significant developments 2014–15 46 Outcome report 17 External scrutiny and controls 47 Program 1: Conducting inquiries into aspects of Australian laws and related Parliamentary scrutiny 47 processes for the purposes of law reform 18 Court and tribunal decisions 47 Inquiries 19 Commonwealth Ombudsman 47 Consultation meetings 23 Human resource management 47 Diversity consultation strategy 24 Staffing 47 Consultation papers and reports 24 Staff retention and turnover 48 Program 1: Key performance indicators 26 Employment conditions 49 Implementation of reports 26 Performance rewards and bonuses 50 Court citations 28 Staff development 50 Submissions 28 Study leave 52 ALRC website 29 Workplace diversity 52 Presentations and speaking Work health and safety 53 engagements 30 Summary of financial performance 54 Media mentions 30 Financial outcomes 54 Additional performance indicators 32 Other reporting requirements 54 Participation in external inquiries 32 Procurement and purchasing 54 Mentions in Parliament 32 Legal services expenditure 55 Online communications 33 Consultancies 55 Challenges for 2014–15 34 Advertising and market research 55 Management and accountability Environmental performance 56 Disability strategy 57 Corporate governance framework 36 Freedom of information 58 1 Financial statements 59 Special features Law reform process 114 Diversity 117 Agency Multicultural Plan (AMP) 117 Reconcililation Action Plan update 118 ALRC internship program 120 International outreach 123 Professional development 123 Australasian Law Reform Agencies Conference (ALRAC) 123 Appendices A. Corporate Plan 2013–2015 126 B. Key supporting policies and documents 129 C. Terms of Reference 2013–14 131 D. Advisory committee members and consultants 2013–14 143 E. Agency resource statement and resources for outcomes 2013–14 146 F. Implementation activity 2013–14 148 G. Implementation status of ALRC reports 2013–14 149 H Citations of ALRC reports in major court decisions 2013–14 163 I. Presentations and articles written for external publications 2013–14 169 J. ALRC newsroom 2013–14 173 K. Submissions made to external inquiries 2013–14 191 L: List of ALRC reports 192 M: ALRC Multicultural Plan report 2013–14 196 N: Reconciliation Action Plan 2012–14 report 207 Glossary and indexes Glossary 216 Compliance Index 219 Index 225 2 Annual Report 2013–14 President’s overview 3 ALRC President, Professor Rosalind Croucher 4 Annual Report 2013–14 It is with great pleasure that I present the ALRC’s Annual Report for 2013–14, my fifth as ALRC President. The ALRC has continued to be a highly productive and responsive law reform agency, working on five inquiries in areas of key concern to the community at this time: Copyright, Disability, Native Title, Privacy and Traditional Rights, Freedoms and Privileges, or what we have called the ‘Freedoms Inquiry’. The importance of an independent law reform agency that can investigate an area of law free from political expectation or the values of particular interests, that is able to start a process with questions not answers, and that draws on the wealth and diversity of experience and knowledge in the community to help inform the reform process, cannot be overestimated. While law reform happens in many government departments, in other agencies and in the courts themselves, it is in the specialist law reform expertise of the ALRC and its ability to provide high level legal policy advice at arm’s length from government, that our value truly lies. The types of law reform reviews that the ALRC is uniquely experienced to undertake include those where there are complex legal issues involved and a need to be—and to be seen to be—completely independent from government, industry and special interests. These reviews involve a need to consult widely with diverse and often opposing stakeholders, and to consider their opinions and interests carefully, so that the Government is provided with independent and frank advice. The subject matter of our current inquiries provides excellent examples of this. Looking at how to enhance the equality of people with disability in Commonwealth laws while the NDIS is being implemented, considering whether the promise of Native Title has been realised 20 years after the landmark Mabo High Court decision, or addressing serious invasions of privacy in the age of the internet are all highly complex and challenging areas of great concern to the community, that require careful and in-depth consideration. Through its widespread and thorough consultation strategies, the ALRC is able to build consensus and understanding of its proposals within the community and this assists the government in turn to implement various recommendations, even in a context where change may be challenging. The community’s faith and trust in the independence of the legal system is bolstered by this independence and it is this, together with the high regard in which the ALRC’s work is held, that has meant we have again been able to leverage relationships with key stakeholders who have continued to contribute to our various inquiries in a most generous manner. I would like to take this opportunity formally to acknowledge and thank the many people from the legal profession, academia, industry, the non-government sector, government departments and agencies and from the community—our stakeholders—for their contribution to our inquiries, through consultations, through our Advisory Committees and Expert Panels and by taking the time to give us their submissions. The quality of the work of the ALRC is a testament to this contribution and helps to ensure that our proposals are sensible and achievable, and that they strike the right balance between competing interests and perspectives to deliver realisable reform to the Australian community. At the end of November we delivered our Report for the Copyright Inquiry, Copyright and the Digital Economy (ALRC Report 122, 2014). This inquiry was one in which our stakeholders were extremely divided, and I want to thank Professor Jill McKeough, Commissioner in charge of the Inquiry, for her dedication to this task and congratulate her on this highly complex, comprehensive and rigorous Report. Reforming copyright law posed a number of important challenges. While the law must be relevant to a complex and changing digital environment, it must also be clear and broadly understood in the community. The law must produce reasonably certain and predictable outcomes, but should also be President's overview 5 flexible and not inhibit innovation. Reforms must also not lose sight of the fundamental objectives of copyright law—to stimulate creation and learning by increasing the incentives to create and distribute copyright material. In recommending the introduction of fair use, the ALRC presented a more flexible and adaptive copyright framework. The introduction of fair use would mean Australian copyright law could be applied to new technologies and new commercial and consumer practices, without constant recourse to legislative change. Fair use would promote innovation and enable a market-based response to the demands of the digital age while also enhancing access to cultural material, without undermining incentives to create. The ALRC undertook widespread consultation in this inquiry, conducting 109 face to face consultations and receiving 1,009 public submissions.
Recommended publications
  • 2017 EABC Business Delegation to Canberra Mission Report
    2017 EABC Business Delegation to Canberra Parliament House, Canberra 24-25 October 2017 Mission Report Overview On Tuesday 24 and Wednesday 25 October 2017, a delegation of EABC Members visited Parliament House in Canberra to meet with members of the Federal Government and Opposition. The delegation provided opportunities for members to engage in direct dialogue on the broad economic and business agenda, as well as the preparations underway for launching negotiations for an Australia-EU FTA. Programme The delegation programme on Tuesday 24 October included roundtable discussions with the Hon Michael McCormack MP, Minister for Small Business and the Hon Darren Chester MP, Minister for Infrastructure and Transport; followed by a Cocktail Reception with Guests of Honour the Hon Barnaby Joyce MP, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources, Minister for Resources and Northern Australia; the Hon Keith Pitt MP, Assistant Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment; the Hon Chris Bowen MP, Shadow Treasurer; and Senator the Hon Mathias Cormann, Minister for Finance and Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate. The programme continued with a working dinner with ministerial guests including the Hon Kelly O’Dwyer MP, Minister for Revenue and Financial Services; the Hon Craig Laundy MP, Assistant Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science; and Justin Brown, Deputy Secretary, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The programme on Wednesday 25 October included roundtable discussions with Tom Skladzien, Chief of Staff
    [Show full text]
  • Budget Estimates 2017-18
    The Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee Budget estimates 2017-18 June 2017 © Commonwealth of Australia 2017 ISBN 978-1-76010-595-2 Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee Secretariat: Ms Lyn Beverley (Secretary) Ms Margaret Cahill (Research Officer) Ms Nicole Baxter (Administrative Officer) The Senate PO Box 6100 Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Ph: 02 6277 3530 Fax: 02 6277 5809 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.aph.gov.au/senate_fpa This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia License. The details of this licence are available on the Creative Commons website: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/au/. Printed by the Senate Printing Unit, Parliament House, Canberra. ii Membership of the Committee Members Senator James Paterson (Chair) LP, VIC Senator Jenny McAllister (Deputy Chair) ALP, NSW Senator Kimberley Kitching ALP, VIC Senator Bridget McKenzie NAT, VIC Senator Lee Rhiannon AG, NSW Senator Dean Smith LP, WA Senators in attendance Senators Paterson (Chair), McAllister (Deputy Chair), Kitching, McKenzie, Smith, Rhiannon, Abetz, Bernardi, Bushby, Cameron, Dastyari, Dodson, Duniam, Farrell, Gallacher, Gallagher, Griff, Hanson, Hinch, Collins, Kakoschke-Moore, Lines, McCarthy, Moore, Polley, Pratt, Rice, Roberts, Siewert, Waters, Watt, Wong, Xenophon iii Table of Contents Membership of the Committee ........................................................................ iii Chapter 1.............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Australia's Tilt on China
    Facts 澳大利亚-中国关系研究院Australia-China Relations Institute 澳大利亚-中国关系研究院 December 13 2017 Australia’s tilt on China: An update In July 2017 the Australia-China Relations Institute [The importance of the rules-based order] (ACRI) published the fact sheet ‘Australia’s tilt lies in the fact that it has seen the greatest on China’, which details Australian government expansion of prosperity in human history, representatives’ statements on China and the hundreds of millions of people being lifted out Australia-China relationship in the first half of the of poverty in recent decades. Australia and year. 1 China with all nations must work together to strengthen and defend that international rules- Since this time, the messages sent on the bilateral based order because we all stand to benefit. relationship have been mixed. I particularly want to acknowledge that with Addressing the Asia Society in New York on China’s growing power and influence it has September 22, Australian Foreign Minister Julie taken on a global role in supporting that Bishop said:2 international rules based order and I use the example of China’s principled stand in We support China playing a greater leadership supporting and defending the United Nations role in reinforcing and strengthening the rules- Security Council in upholding its authority in based order that has enabled its rise and relation to the egregious behaviour of North continues to underpin its growing prosperity. Korea. Minister Bishop repeated this sentiment in a In her Confucius Institute Annual Lecture at the November 23 speech on the 45th anniversary of University of Adelaide on October 7, Secretary Australia’s diplomatic relations with the People’s of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Republic of China:3 Frances Adamson said:4 This fact sheet was prepared by Simone van Nieuwenhuizen, In such promising times, both countries should Project and Research Support Officer, Australia-China Relations Institute, University of Technology Sydney.
    [Show full text]
  • Christian Porter
    Article Talk Read View source View history Search Wikipedia Christian Porter From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Citation bot (talk | contribs) at 17:14, 25 February 2021 (Add: work. Removed parameters. Main page Some additions/deletions were parameter name changes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by AManWithNoPlan | Pages linked from Contents cached User:AManWithNoPlan/sandbox2 | via #UCB_webform_linked 268/1473). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this Current events revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision. Random article (diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) About Wikipedia Contact us For the singer, see The Voice (U.S. season 4). Donate Charles Christian Porter (born 11 July 1970) is an Australian Liberal Party politician and Contribute The Honourable lawyer serving as Attorney-General of Australia since 2017, and has served as Member of Christian Porter Help Parliament (MP) for Pearce since 2013. He was appointed Minister for Industrial Relations MP Learn to edit and Leader of the House in 2019. Community portal Recent changes From Perth, Porter attended Hale School, the University of Western Australia and later the Upload file London School of Economics, and practised law at Clayton Utz and taught law at the University of Western Australia before his election to parliament. He is the son of the 1956 Tools Olympic silver medallist, Charles "Chilla" Porter, and the grandson of Queensland Liberal What links here politician, Charles Porter, who was a member of the Queensland Legislative Assembly from Related changes [4][5] Special pages 1966 to 1980.
    [Show full text]
  • 29 March 2017 Malcolm Turnbull MP Prime Minister Parliament House
    29 March 2017 Malcolm Turnbull MP Prime Minister Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Dear Prime Minister, On behalf of Australian Quakers, I wish to make the following comments on Government moves to amend the Racial Discrimination Act: • We see Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 as protecting the most vulnerable and marginalized members of our Australian community. • We consider that the process by which the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) responds to complaints under Section 18C is working well, in that most cases are resolved through conciliation, and few reach the courts. • In our view, the existing law is effective and strikes an appropriate balance between protecting minorities and preserving freedom of expression in our multicultural community. We appreciate the thorough way in which The Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights examined Sections 18C and 18D and affirm its conclusion that no amendment is needed. It was clearly influenced by the substantial evidence from many quarters about the importance of the current legislation in protecting minorities and diversity. At the same time, it has identified ways in which the processes could be improved, and most of its recommendations in that regard are consistent with what the Human Rights Commission itself has been seeking. We urge all MPs and Senators to maintain the strength of the current legislation intact, and to modify the processes along the lines outlined in the Committee’s report. Regards, Jo Jordan Presiding Clerk The Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) in Australia cc: Senator the Hon George Brandis, Attorney General Hon Mark Dreyfus, Shadow Attorney General Australia Yearly Meeting The Religious Society of Friends Tel 0423 308 550 (Quakers) in Australia Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Christian Porter Has Shown Himself Unfit to Be Federal Attorney–General
    Christian Porter has shown himself unfit to be federal Attorney–General Ian Cunliffe - Pearls and Irritations - 29 September 2020 https://johnmenadue.com/christian-porter-has-shown-himself-unfit-to-be-federal-attorney-general/ By his response last week to the Federal Court’s finding that Immigration Minister Alan Tudge engaged in criminal conduct by detaining an asylum-seeker for five days in defiance of an order by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), Christian Porter has shown himself unfit to be federal Attorney–General. Porter’s response condoned Tudge’s conduct. Porter said that Tudge’s action was “in effect government undertaking its duties through the minister as a matter of policy … the Minister clearly rejects [the court’s] conclusions”. And so the First Law Officer of the Commonwealth excused the Minister’s – the Minister was implementing Government policy, and, implicitly in Porter’s view, policy trumps the criminal law and trumps the orders of courts or tribunals. That is an appalling statement and an appalling state of affairs. An Attorney–General’s highest duty is to uphold the law. He is responsible for the administration of justice federally. His duty is to support the courts, and respect for them and for their rulings. Those are the very foundation stones of the Rule of Law in Australia. Like no other ministers, attorneys–general are trusted by our constitutional system with duties that need to be exercised independently and responsibly. Those responsibilities include in appointing judges and tribunal members. Porter and his predecessor, George Brandis, have stacked the AAT with Liberal Party cronies, many of whom have no legal qualifications.
    [Show full text]
  • To: Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, Attorney General George Brandis
    To: Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, Attorney General George Brandis, Minister for the Arts Mitch Fifield, Premiers of State Governments, media representatives, public and private agencies and stakeholders. From: Donald Richardson, OAM, B.A., Dip.Art, T.Dip.Art, RSASA, and Vesna Tenodi, MA Archaeology, artist and writer, on behalf of Australian non-Aboriginal artists vilified by the Arts Law Centre Sydney, 10/02/2016 Request for the Australian Government to intervene in the Arts Law Centre of Australia breach of moral rights of non-Aboriginal artists Benedikt Osváth and Gina Sinozich, and to instruct the Arts Law Centre to remove or change its offensive wording and lack of acknowledgement in its material, articles and publications – in all the instances where the wording is in breach of Australian Copyright Law Also attached: Request to the Arts Law Centre of Australia, 2 October 2015; Aboriginal Violence Awareness Day 2015 Despite our repeated requests (Attachment A) the Arts Law Centre of Australia has not complied with current Australian law and is still breaching our and our artists moral rights. The images of our “Wanjina Watchers in the Whispering Stone” sculpture are still published in some of the Arts Law Centre material without proper attribution, without mention of the artist’s name and without our artwork title. Furthermore, the images are often accompanied with highly offensive captions, false accusations and derogatory, slanderous and hate-inciting comments. This ongoing breach denies us and our artists all of our moral rights, as due to us under Australian Copyright Law: 1. the right of attribution (naming the artist); 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Report on the Australian Government’S Refusal to Acknowledge the Occupation of East Jerusalem
    Comprehensive report on the Australian government’s refusal to acknowledge the occupation of East Jerusalem Nicholas Elmitt July 2014 Executive Summary On June 4, 2014, Senator George Brandis indicated a shift in Australian policy towards the Israeli occupation of Jerusalem be stating that Occupied East Jerusalem would be referred to as Disputed by the Abbott government. Senator Brandis is the Attorney-General and Minister for the Arts in the Abbott-led Liberal/National Coalition Government that was elected in the 2013 Australian Federal Election,1 however on this occasion he was representing the Foreign Minister (Julie Bishop) in a Senate Estimates hearing into the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee. The significance of the statements cannot be overstated as it signified the end of decades of bipartisan support for a two-state solution to the Israel- Palestine conflict based on international negotiations as supported by international law and resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly and the United Nations Security Council. The purpose of this report is to provide accounts of all statements made relevant to Senator Brandis’ initial statement and the follow-up statement made the following day, to provide an overview of the response from the Government, the Opposition and other politicians, from diplomatic figures and interested foreign actors, and from the media and the public. This information will be placed in the context of the gradual shift in policies regarding Israel and Palestine under the Abbott government which can be used to support actions and statements to be made in the future, as well as providing an historical record for the Palestinian Authority in the case of future similar events in Australia or in other nations.
    [Show full text]
  • Timbuckleyieefa DIRTY POWER BIG COAL's NETWORK of INFLUENCE OVER the COALITION GOVERNMENT CONTENTS
    ICAC investigation: Lobbying, Access and Influence (Op Eclipse) Submission 2 From: Tim Buckley To: Lobbying Subject: THE REGULATION OF LOBBYING, ACCESS AND INFLUENCE IN NSW: A CHANCE TO HAVE YOUR SAY Date: Thursday, 16 May 2019 2:01:39 PM Attachments: Mav2019-GPAP-Dirtv-Power-Report.Ddf Good afternoon I am delighted that the NSW ICAC is looking again into the issue of lobbying and undue access by lobbyists representing self-serving, private special interest groups, and the associated lack of transparency. This is most needed when it relates to the private (often private, foreign tax haven based entities with zero transparency or accountability), use of public assets. IEEFA works in the public interest analysis relating to the energy-fmance-climate space, and so we regularly see the impact of the fossil fuel sector in particular as one that thrives on the ability to privatise the gains for utilising one-time use public assets and in doing so, externalising the costs onto the NSW community. This process is constantly repeated. The community costs, be they in relation to air, particulate and carbon pollution, plus the use of public water, and failure to rehabilitate sites post mining, brings a lasting community cost, particularly in the area of public health costs. The cost-benefit analysis presented to the IPC is prepared by the proponent, who has an ability to present biased self-serving analysis that understates the costs and overstates the benefits. To my understanding, the revolving door of regulators, politicians, fossil fuel companies and their lobbyists is corrosive to our democracy, undermining integrity and fairness.
    [Show full text]
  • Free Speech 2014 Symposium Thursday, 7 August 2014 Aerial Function Centre, Sydney
    Free Speech 2014 symposium Thursday, 7 August 2014 Aerial Function Centre, Sydney Starts Ends Theme Format Topic Speakers 08.00 08.50 Registrations 08.50 09.00 Speech Attendees asked to be seated Conference Chair: Jana Wendt 09.00 09.10 Presentation Welcome to country Aunty Norma Ingram - Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council 09.10 09.20 Speech Introductory remarks Professor Gillian Triggs - President, Australian Human Rights Commission Opening session 09.20 09.50 Keynote address Free speech reflections Senator the Hon George Brandis QC - Attorney-General 09.50 10.10 Speech Free speech stocktake Tim Wilson - Australian Human Rights Commissioner 10.10 10.30 Speech ALRC Inquiry into Freedoms Professor Rosalind Croucher - President, Australian Law Reform Commission 10.30 10.50 Morning tea Free speech in a liberal democracy Chris Berg - Director of Policy, Institute of Public Affairs Accommodating rights Speeches & Does defamation law deserve ridicule? Dr Roy Baker - Macquarie School of Law 10.50 11.55 (Session 1) questions Vilification laws Dr Augusto Zimmermann - School of Law, Murdoch University The commercial environment Dr Kesten Green - University of South Australia Business School Combating online harassment Dr Monika Bickert - Head of Global Content Policy, Facebook Free speech in the digital Speeches & 11.55 12.50 Reforming intellectual property Trish Hepworth - Australian Digital Alliance age questions Free speech & the internet Professor Julian Thomas - Swinburne Institute for Social Research 12.50 13.30 Lunch Dr Gary Johns
    [Show full text]
  • Download PDF Read More
    ALRC 2009–10 R E P O R T 113 ANNUAL REPORT Requests and inquiries regarding this report should be addressed to: The Executive Director Australian Law Reform Commission GPO Box 3708 Sydney NSW 2001 Telephone: (02) 8238 6333 Fax: (02) 8238 6363 Email: [email protected] This report is also accessible online at: www.alrc.gov.au ISBN 978-0-9807194-3-7 Print Post Approval Number: PP255003/02228 © Commonwealth of Australia 2010 This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in whole or part, subject to acknowledgement of the source, for your personal, non- commercial use or use within your organisation. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), all other rights are reserved. Requests for further authorisation should be directed to the Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Copyright Law Branch, Attorney-General’s Department, Robert Garran Offices, National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600. Alternatively, an online request form is available at <www. ag.gov.au/cca>. Printed by Union Offset Printers ii Professor David Weisbrot AM ProfessorProfessor Rosalind David WeisbrotF Croucher AM PresPresidentident President The Honourable Robert McClelland MP The Honourable Philip Ruddock MP TheAttorney-General Honourable Philip Ruddock MP Attorney-General Attorney-GeneralParliament House Parliament House Parliament House CanberraCanberra ACT ACT 2600 2600 Canberra ACT 2600 2219 OctoberSeptember 2007 2010 19 October 2007 Dear Attorney-General Dear Attorney-General Dear Attorney-General On behalf of the members of the Australian Law Reform Commission, I am pleased to present the On behalf of the members of the Australian Law Reform Commission, I am pleased to present the Annual Report of the Australian Law Reform Commission for the period 1 July 2006 to 30 June Annual Report of the Australian Law Reform Commission for the period 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • Workplace Law Special Edition
    LAW INSTITUTE JOURNAL INSTITUTE LAW OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY | LEGAL FIRMS | EMPLOYMENT STATUS | WAGES | FAIR WORK ACT | EMPLOYEE PROTECTION MAY 2021 MAY 2021 WORKPLACE LAW SPECIAL EDITION WHY THE LAW SHOULD ALLOW FOR COMPULSORY TESTING IN A PANDEMIC WORKPLACE LAW SPECIAL EDITION • VACCINATION GUIDE • LEGAL FIRMS • EMPLOYMENT STATUS • WAGES • FAIR WORK ACT • EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION COVID-19 • BUSINESS POST-LOCKDOWN www.liv.asn.au/LIJ www.liv.asn.au/LIJ • ZOOMING INTO NEW JOBS HEALTH AND WELLBEING PP100007900 ISSN 0023-9267 PP100007900 ISSN 0023-9267 ACCENTUATE THE POSITIVE RRP $20 95.5 Successful law firms are agile Whether you’re at home or back in the office, LEAP lets you work with flexibility. On the go In the office In court At home leap.com.au/agile-law-firms Contents May 2021 WORKPLACE LAW SPECIAL EDITION FROM PAGE 22 Vaccination guide Legal firms Employment status Wages Fair Work Act Employment protection Law firms after COVID-19 How firms have adapted By Karin Derkley PAGE 11 Zooming into new jobs The challenge of starting a new role during the pandemic By Karin Derkley PAGE 15 Health and wellbeing Accentuate the positive By Megan Fulford PAGE 87 ADOBE STOCK MAY 2021 LAW INSTITUTE JOURNAL 1 Contents May 2021 workplace law special edition Protect the best interests FEATURES NEWS EVERY ISSUE 4 Contributors OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY FIRMS 6 From the president Law firms after COVID-19 of your clients with 22 A shot in the arm 11 8 Unsolicited A COVID-19 vaccine has arrived but the The pandemic dealt an initial blow COURTS & PARLIAMENT pandemic's twists and turns are not over yet.
    [Show full text]