DOCSLIB.ORG

Australian Law Journal and Australian Law Journal Reports

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Australian Law Journal and Australian Law Journal Reports INDEX TO VOLUMES 77-82 (2003-2008) Index compiled by ALAN WALKER BA (Hons), DipLib LAWBOOK CO. 2009 Customer Service and sales inquiries: Tel: 1300 304 195 Fax: 1300 304 196 Web: www.thomsonreuters.com Email: [email protected] Editorial inquiries: Tel: (02) 8587 7000 HEAD OFFICE 100 Harris Street PYRMONT NSW 2009 Tel: (02) 8587 7000 Fax: (02) 8587 7100 © 2009 Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited ABN 64 058 914 688 trading as Lawbook Co. ISSN 0813-4073 Published in Sydney by Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited 100 Harris Street, Pyrmont NSW 2009 Typeset by Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited, Pyrmont, NSW Printed by Ligare Pty Ltd, Riverwood, NSW Table of Contents Volumes 77-82 Page Preface .......................................................................................................................................................... iii General Editors of the Australian Law Journal ............................................................................................ iv Table of Authors .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Table of Cases ............................................................................................................................................. 15 General Index .............................................................................................................................................. 171 Editors of the Australian Law Journal Reports ............................................................................................ 224 Index to the High Court Reports ................................................................................................................. 225 PREFACE The tables and indexes in this volume classify the material in Volumes 77-82 of The Australian Law Journal and The Australian Law Journal Reports. The Index of Authors lists, under authors’ names arranged alphabetically, articles and more extended com- ments in the Journal. The subject matter of these articles and comments appears in the General Index. The Table of Cases includes all Australian, English and other decisions which have formed the subject mat- ter of explanation and comment in articles, notes and paragraphs in the various parts of the Journal. The Table of Cases also includes decisions of the High Court which are reported in The Australian Law Journal Reports (Volumes 77-82). The General Index, arranged by subject matter, indicates the material to be found in the articles and in all the comments appearing in the Journal. An asterisk (*) points out the more important discussion of a particu- lar subject. The Index to High Court Reports indicates the content of the High Court decisions which have been re- ported in The Australian Law Journal Reports. iii GENERAL EDITORS OF THE AUSTRALIAN LAW JOURNAL 1927 to 1946 THE LATE B SUGERMAN KC afterwards The Honourable Sir Bernard Sugerman, President of the Court of Appeal, Supreme Court of New South Wales 1946 to 1961 THE LATE N H BOWEN QC afterwards The Honourable Sir Nigel Bowen, sometime Chief Judge of the Federal Court of Australia; sometime the Attorney-General for the Commonwealth of Australia; Chief Judge in Equity, Supreme Court of New South Wales 1946 to 1958 R ELSE-MITCHELL QC sometime Chairman, Grants Commission; sometime a Judge of the Supreme Court of New South Wales and of the Land and Valuation Court 1958 to 1967 RUSSELL FOX QC sometime a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia; sometime Ambassador at Large for the Australian Government in relation to matters concerning Nuclear Nonproliferation and Nuclear Safeguards; sometime the Chief Judge of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory 1968 to 1973 THE LATE PHILIP JEFFREY QC sometime a Judge of the Supreme Court of New South Wales 1974 to 1992 J G STARKE QC Professor of Humanitarian Law of the International Institute of Humanitarian Law, San Remo, Italy 1992 THE HON MR JUSTICE P W YOUNG AO Chief Judge in Equity, Supreme Court of New South Wales iv Table of Authors Table of Authors Volumes 77 - 82 [Numbers in bold type refer to volume] ADAMS, MICHAEL Heroes and Heresy: Myth Meets Legal Fundamentalism ................................................................ 78.587 AITKEN, LEE Jurisdiction, Substantive Relief and the Asset Preservation Order .................................................. 81.431 Re-Calibrating Interests: Co-ownership in Equity ........................................................................... 81.266 Recovery of Chattels in the Common and Civil Law: Possession, Bailment, and Spoliation Suits ............................................................................................................................. .82.379 When are Damages an Adequate Remedy? ..................................................................................... 78.544 AITKEN, LEE and HUGH STOWE Issues in Corporate Insolvency: Statutory Demands and Corporations Act, s 440A ....................... 79.182 ARDEN, MARY (LADY) Companies Act 2006 (UK): A New Approach to Directors’ Duties ................................................ 81.162 Meeting the Challenge of Terrorism: The Experience of English and Other Courts ....................... 80.818 ARMYTAGE, LIVINGSTON Pakistan’s Law and Justice Sector Reform Experience: Some Lessons .......................................... 78.50 ATHERTON, ROSALIND Who Owns Your Body? ................................................................................................................... 77.139 AUSTIN, R P and KRISTIN VAN ZWIETEN Termination and Setting Aside of Winding-Up Orders .................................................................... 81.932 BARKER, IAN Judicial Activism in Australia .......................................................................................................... 79.783 BARNETT, DARRELL The Commonwealth: A Multitude of Manifestations Federal Jurisdiction under s 75(iii) of the Constitution .................................................................................................................................. 81.195 Resettlement: Finding the New Charter of Rights ........................................................................... 80.254 BASTIN, LUCAS and BRIAN TAMBERLIN Australia and the World Trade Organization: Decision Enforcement .............................................. 81.802 David Hicks in the Australian Courts: Past and Future Legal Issues ............................................... 82.774 Volumes 77-82 1 Table of Authors BEAUMONT, NICHOLAS What are “Reasonable Prospects of Success’’? ............................................................................... 78.812 BENNETT, J M The Royal Prerogative of Mercy – Putting in the Boots .................................................................. 81.35 BERGIN, P A Mediation in Hong Kong: The Way Forward – Perspectives from Australia .................................. 82.196 BEVAN, CHRISTOPHER Income Tax System of Australia: The Case for a New General Anti-Avoidance Rule .................... 79.364 BIEGLER, PAUL and CAMERON STEWART A Primer on the Law of Competence to Refuse Medical Treatment ............................................... 78.325 BIRCH, JEREMY Breach of Confidence: Dividing the Cause of Action along Proprietary Lines ............................... 81.338 BLAKE, GARTH Promoting Religious Tolerance in a Multifaith Society: Religious Vilification Legislation in Australia and the UK .................................................................................................................... 81.386 Serving God and the Church: Clergy, Employment and Discrimination ......................................... 80.571 BOGE, CHRIS A Buyer’s “Interest” in Land under an Uncompleted Contract: A Return to Principle ................... 82.$266 BOLAND, JENNIFER Family Law: Changing Law for a Changing Society ...................................................................... 81.554 BOLESKI, WILFRIED Diplomatic Privileges in Practice ..................................................................................................... 78.88 Misuse and Protection of Diplomatic and Consular Titles .............................................................. 77.750 BONNELL, MAX Arbitrability of Competition Disputes in Australian Law ................................................................ 79.585 BONNELL, MAX and PETER MEGENS The Bakun Dispute: Mandatory National Laws in International Arbitration .................................. 81.259 BORSKY, MICHAEL Absence of Basis: A Path to Reconciliation between Australian and English Unjust Enrichment Law? ............................................................................................................................................. 79.507 BOURKE, JUDY Equine Influenza: The Legal Framework of Quarantine ................................................................. 81.894 BOYD, SUSAN Australian Judges at Work Internationally: Treason, Assassinations, Coups, Legitimacy of Government, Human Rights, Poverty and Development ............................................................. 77.303 BRENNAN, GERARD (SIR) “Introduction to Human Rights Law”: Seminar – Part II ................................................................ 81.248 2 The Australian Law Journal Table of Authors BRERETON,
Recommended publications
  • Contents Volume 29 2/2010

    Contents Volume 29 2/2010

    Contents -------------------------- 1 President’s Report Barry McGaw The Price of Fear 5 Life as a Weapon: Making Sense of Suicide Bombings Riaz Hassan 10 Fear, Asylum, and Hansonism in Australian Politics William Maley 20 Alien Fears: Politics and Immigration Control Mary Crock 31 ‘Preposterous Caricatures’: Fear, Tokenism, Denial and the Australia-Indonesia Relationship Tim Lindsey 44 Fear: Crime and Punishment Chris Cunneen 55 AIDS and Religion: ‘This Wave of Hate Must Stop’ Michael Kirby 62 Books 65 Genetics of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Mark A Bellgrove 69 Academy News and Workshop Reports 81 An Ethics for Living in the Anthropocene Katherine Gibson, Ruth Fincher and Deborah Bird Rose 85 Philanthropy and Public Culture: The influence and legacies of the Carnegie Corporation of New York in Australia Kate Darian-Smith, Julie McLeod and Glenda Sluga 91 Unsettling the Settler State: Creativity and resistance in Indigenous- Settler state governance Morgan Brigg, Sarah Maddison and Jon Altman 95 Roundtable Reports ------------------------- Volume 29 2/2010 Dialogue 29, 2/2010 President’s Report he Academy is commencing a strategic review to shape T its program and its working arrangements. The Review of the Structure, Systems and Processes of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia undertaken for the Academy by Professor Ian Palmer provides one important starting point. The terms of reference set by the Academy for the review gave it an internal focus. They were: 1. Does the Secretariat provide adequate support to the Committees and to the Fellows? 2. Does the ASSA administration (Executive Committee and Secretariat) articulate and communicate effectively with the Fellows? 3.
  • Submission to the Royal Commission Into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability

    Submission to the Royal Commission Into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability

    Submission to the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability Submission on laws, policies and practice affecting migrants, refugees and citizens from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds January 2021 Sydney Centre for International Law The University of Sydney Law School Building (F10) Camperdown Campus, The University of Sydney NSW 2006 [email protected] With Macquarie Law School Social Justice Clinic About the Sydney Centre for International Law The Sydney Centre for International Law (SCIL) was established in 2003 as a centre of excellence in research and teaching in international law. The centre fosters innovative, interdisciplinary scholarship across the international legal field, and also provides an avenue for the public to access international legal expertise. It operates within the University of Sydney Law School, building upon its well-recognised history of strength in this area. This submission was prepared by the following SCIL interns under the supervision and with the assistance of SCIL Director Professor Mary Crock. Parts 1 – 3; Part 10 Sarah Charak*; Wendy Chen*; Angus Chen*; Sherry Xueyi Jin; John McCrorie*; Leah Park; Rachel Sun*; Emma Louise Tirabosco;* Siobhan Walsh; Frank Gang Yang. Parts 4 - 6 Freya Appleford*; Sarah Charak; Angus Chen; Jake Jerogin*; Emma Kench*; Maxine McHugh; Miranda Hutchenson; Anton Nguyen*; Alexandra Touw; Jiann Yap; Alan Zheng*; Kevin Zou*; Part 7 Jess Mitchell*; Anisha Gunawardhana*; Part 8 Mary Crock; Olivia Morris; Part 9 Mary Crock with Macquarie University Law School Social Justice Clinic and the National Justice Project– Associate Professor Daniel Ghezelbash; Thomas Boyes, Sarah Croake, Jemy Ma; and Sara Hakim* (as a volunteer at the National Justice Project).
  • John Latham in Owen Dixon's Eyes

    John Latham in Owen Dixon's Eyes

    Chapter Six John Latham in Owen Dixon’s Eyes Professor Philip Ayres Sir John Latham’s achievements are substantial in a number of fields, and it is surprising that, despite the accessibility of the Latham Papers at the National Library, no-one has written a biography, though Stuart Macintyre, who did the Australian Dictionary of Biography entry, has told me that he had it in mind at one stage. Latham was born in 1877, nine years before Owen Dixon. As a student at the University of Melbourne, Latham held exhibitions and scholarships in logic, philosophy and law, and won the Supreme Court Judges’ Prize, being called to the Bar in 1904. He also found time to captain the Victorian lacrosse team. From 1917 he was head of Naval Intelligence (lieutenant-commander), and was on the Australian staff at the Versailles Peace Conference. Latham’s personality was rather aloof and cold. Philosophically he was a rationalist. From 1922-34 he was MHR for the Victorian seat of Kooyong (later held by R G Menzies and Andrew Peacock), and federal Attorney-General from 1925-29 in the Nationalist government, and again in 1931–34 in the Lyons United Australia Party government. In addition he was Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for External Affairs from 1931-34. He resigned his seat and was subsequently appointed Chief Justice of the High Court (1935-52), taking leave in 1940-41 to go off to Tokyo as Australia’s first Minister to Japan. Latham was a connoisseur of Japanese culture. He fostered a Japan-Australia friendship society in the 1930s, and in 1934 he led an Australian diplomatic mission to Japan, arranging at that time for the visit to Australia of the Japanese training flotilla.
  • A CASE STUDY of LOUTH V DIPROSE*

    A CASE STUDY of LOUTH V DIPROSE*

    STORYTELLING AND THE LAW: A CASE STUDY OF LOUTH v DIPROSE* By Lisa Sarmas^ [Legal storytelling is a relatively new addition to critical legal scholarship. This article draws on its insights and methodology, exploring the stories told and untold in legal discourse, with specific reference to the case of Louth v Diprose. The author links both the outcome of the case and the doctrinal development which it signalled, to the narratives deployed by the majority judges. It is contended that these narratives, as well as those of the judges in dissent, reflect and reinforce domi­ nant ideas about gender and social class. The article concludes with a consideration of the strategies which might be employed by those who seek to include previously silenced voices in legal discourse.] Introduction [I]n some respect this is but one more case in the annals of human relationships in which an infatuated but unrequited suitor has lavished gifts upon the subject of his infatuation, well knowing what he was doing and intending to do it, but in a sense allowing his heart to rule his head. Jacobs ACJ1 To make sense of law and to organize experience, people often tell stories. And these stories are telling. Kim Lane Scheppele2 Legal storytelling poses a radical challenge to established ways of thinking and writing about the law. In recent years it has emerged as a powerful force in the legal academy.3 My aim in this article is to engage its insights in an exam­ * Diprose v Louth (No 1) (1990) 54 SASR 438 (King CJ); Diprose v Louth (No 2) (1990) 54 SASR 450 (Full Court); Louth v Diprose (1992) 175 CLR 621 (High Court).
  • Law Council of Australia 75Th Anniversary Dinner Speech

    Law Council of Australia 75Th Anniversary Dinner Speech

    Cause for Celebration Law Council of Australia 75th Anniversary Dinner Chief Justice Robert French 19 September 2008 The Law Council of Australia was established by the First Conference of the Legal Societies of Australia which was held in Sydney on 18, 19 and 20 April 1933 and was convened at the instigation of the Law Society of South Australia. Sir John Latham who was then Commonwealth Attorney-General acted as President of the Conference. It adopted a draft Constitution for a Law Council of Australia. In the "Current Topics" section of the Australian Law Journal of 15 May 1933 some of the purposes behind the project were set out. They disclosed a largeness of vision that has informed the work of the Law Council since that time. The editorial writer said: In addition to the general advantages of co-operation, there are many specific spheres, such as law reform, statute law uniformity, the study of comparative legislation, legal education, reciprocal provision, for the admission of practitioners, the consideration of Federal legislation in the manner in which some of the State bodies now consider State legislation, and the like, in which such co- operation will be of benefit both to the public and the profession.1 In opening the Conference, Sir John Latham pointed to some of the matters upon which the proposed Law Council might be of assistance to the public. He covered many topics including one which, in the event, took quite a long time to sort out. He said: I would like to see a little bit more professional examination of the Constitution.
  • The Legality of the Deportation of Long-Term Residents from Australia

    The Legality of the Deportation of Long-Term Residents from Australia

    ‘AN “ALIEN” BY THE BAREST OF THREADS’* — THE LEGALITY OF THE DEPORTATION OF LONG-TERM RESIDENTS FROM AUSTRALIA MICHELLE FOSTER† [The banishment of long-term permanent residents from Australia following criminal conviction is a controversial practice, yet one that has been increasingly employed by the Australian government in recent years. This article assesses the legality of this practice both in terms of domestic and international law. The article first considers the history of both constitutional doctrine and legislative developments in this area, explaining how it is that the Commonwealth can lawfully engage in the deportation of Australian residents who are citizens but for ‘the barest of technicalities’. In the latter half of the article, the analysis turns to consider the international law context to this issue, with particular focus on the extent to which the advent of international human rights law has curtailed states’ plenary power in this arena. The article concludes that the deportation of long-term residents implicates a number of Australia’s key international obligations and thus makes recommendations for urgent reform of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).] CONTENTS I Introduction............................................................................................................. 484 II The Deportation of Long-Term Residents from Australia: Constitutional Background............................................................................................................. 489 III The Deportation of Long-Term Residents
  • Victorian Bar News

    Victorian Bar News

    162 VICTORIAN BAR NEWS BAR VICTORIAN ISSUE 162 SUMMER 2017 Slow boat to Shanghai VICTORIAN Ingrid Braun Teaching advocacy BAR far away NEWS Campbell Thomson Everything is orange: my year in Amsterdam Morgan Brown The Travel Issue SUMMER 2017 162 Meet the new Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Victoria Our Corporate Programme rewards are engineered around You. Mercedes-Benz vehicles are the choice of those who demand the best. Our Corporate Programme is designed to make ownership easier for you. As a privileged member the rewards available to you include: • Reduced dealer delivery fee^ • Complimentary scheduled servicing* • Total of 4 years Mercedes-Benz roadside care Take advantage of the benefits today. Call 1800 888 170 or visit www.mercedes-benz/corporate Corporate Programme is subject to eligibility. * Up to 3 years or 75,000km from new (whichever comes first). AMG (excluding V12 vehicles) 3 years or 60,000 km from new (whichever comes first). All V12 vehicles 3 years or 50,000km from new (whichever comes first). ^ Not applicable to all models. ISSUE 162 SUMMER 2017 VICTORIAN BAR NEWS Editorial News and Views Big shoes to fill 7 42 Winemakers at the Bar THE EDITORS CAMPBELL THOMSON Letters to the editors 9 44 Teaching Advocacy far away CAMPBELL THOMSON President’s report 10 JENNIFER BATROUNEY QC 47 Barristers on the move: Is a change as good as a holiday? CEO’s report 15 JENNIFER BATROUNEY QC 47 Perth is where the heart is HELEN TIPLADY Welcome — The Hon. 17 Anne Ferguson 10 48 Moving to Amsterdam BANJO MCLACHLAN MORGAN BROWN 50 Slow boat sabbatical Around town INGRID BRAUN Warren CJ farewell dinner 18 52 Moving to the Brisbane Bar MARK COSTELLO BEN GARDINER Victorian Bar Legends 20 53 A view of Sydney — Dress Codes SIOBHÁN RYAN ED HEEREY Farewell to the Hon.
  • Conviction, Detention and Removal: the Multiple Punishment of Offenders Under Section 501 Migration Act

    Conviction, Detention and Removal: the Multiple Punishment of Offenders Under Section 501 Migration Act

    1 Conviction, detention and removal: the multiple punishment of offenders under section 501 Migration Act Paper presented to the Australian and New Zealand Society of Criminology Conference, University of Western Australia, Perth, 24 November 2009. Dr.Michael Grewcock, Faculty of Law, University of New South Wales. Abstract Under S501 of the Migration Act, being imprisoned for a criminal offence can constitute grounds for visa cancellation, even for people who have spent most of their lives in Australia. ‘Non‐citizens’ who have had their visas cancelled in this way are liable to detention on completion of their prison sentence; form a distinct cohort within the immigration detainee population; and are routinely deported. Developing themes outlined initially at the Critical Criminology conference hosted by Monash University in Melbourne in July 2009, this paper examines the punitive implications of S501 including: its impact on risk assessment and the parole process; the institutionalisation of double punishment; and the multiple mechanisms of disempowerment operating through the detention regime. While this remains work in progress, the paper argues that criminal convictions do not justify detention and removal, and suggests a framework for future research, as part of a wider project to examine the administrative transformation of lawful into unlawful subjects. Introduction On 20 October 2009, 43 year‐old UK citizen Andrew Moore, who had been a permanent resident in Australia since he was 11 years old, was deported to the UK. Prior to his removal, Moore had been in immigration detention and was known to be suffering from a number of serious health problems. He was accompanied on the flight by five people, including two federal police officers, his immigration department caseworker and a doctor.
  • Imagereal Capture

    Imagereal Capture

    Case notes R v CARROLL: DOUBLE JEOPARADY UNDER FIRE The longstanding principle of double jeopardy is under siege. The United Kingdom is at the forefront of introducing changes to the principle of double jeopardy. Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Bill 2002' seeks to reform the law relating to double jeopardy, by per- mitting retrials for a number of serious offences, where new and persuasive evidence2 becomes available. The prosecuting authorities3will have the power to apply to the Court of Appeal for an acquittal to be quashed, and for a retrial to take place. The Court of Appeal must be satis- fied that the new evidence is a compelling indication of the acquitted person's guilt. The new law will only apply to offences which carry a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, and for which the consequences for victims and society as a whole are serious. Such offences include murder, manslaughter, and rape.4 Where the Court of Appeal quashes an acquittal, the prosecuting authorities may then indict the respective individual for the same offence, and a retrial will follow. The Court of Appeal may refuse to quash an acquittal in cases where the evidence is not new and compelling, or where it is not considered in the interests of justice to proceed with a retrial. Notwithstanding fundamental challenges to the doctrine being considered by the British ~arliament,~in R v C~rroll,~the High Court of Australia has emphatically reaf- firmed its support of the double jeopardy principle. The rule against double jeopardy means that a person cannot be tried for an offence if he or she has already been acquitted or convicted of the same offence at a previous trial.
  • Strengthening Statutory Unconscionable Conduct and the Franchising Code of Conduct

    Strengthening Statutory Unconscionable Conduct and the Franchising Code of Conduct

    Strengthening statutory unconscionable conduct and the Franchising Code of Conduct February 2010 Strengthening statutory unconscionable conduct and the Franchising Code of Conduct Report to the Hon Dr Craig Emerson MP Minister for Small Business, Independent Contractors and the Service Economy Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs February 2010 © Commonwealth of Australia 2010 ISBN 978-0-642-74587-3 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the: Commonwealth Copyright Administration Attorney-General’s Department 3-5 National Circuit BARTON ACT 2600 Or posted at: http://www.ag.gov.au/cca LETTER TO THE MINISTER The Hon Dr Craig Emerson MP Minister for Small Business, Independent Contractors and the Service Economy Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600 Dear Minister In response to the terms of reference provided to us on 26 November 2009, we are pleased to enclose our final report, Strengthening statutory unconscionable conduct and the Franchising Code of Conduct. Yours sincerely Professor Bryan Horrigan Mr David Lieberman Mr Ray Steinwall February 2010 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER TO THE MINISTER ......................................................................................................... III GLOSSARY .............................................................................................................................
  • CLR2021-Vol18 2.Pdf

    CLR2021-Vol18 2.Pdf

    Canberra Law Review (2021) 18(1) ii Canberra Law Review The Canberra Law Review is a peer-reviewed law journal published each year by the Canberra Law School at the University of Canberra. It brings together academics, other scholars, legal practitioners, and students within and outside the University. It provides a peer-reviewed open access venue for innovative, cross- disciplinary and creative scholarly articles and commentaries on law and justice. Submissions The editors of the Canberra Law Review seek submissions on aspects of law. We welcome articles relating to theory and practice, and traditional, innovative and cross- disciplinary approaches to law, justice, policy and society. Guidelines • Scholarly articles should be 5,000-14,000 words, case notes 1,500-3,000 words and book reviews 1,000-1,500 words (including references). • Submissions must conform to the 4th edition of the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (AGLC4) and be 12 pt Times New Roman, single-spaced. • Scholarly articles must be accompanied by an abstract of no more than 250 words. • Submissions must not have been previously published in another journal. Submissions should be emailed as MS Office .docx or .doc documents to [email protected]. Peer-Review Scholarly articles are blind peer-reviewed by reviewers. Open Access Consistent with the Canberra Law School’s emphasis on inclusiveness, the Review is open access: an electronic version is available on the University of Canberra website and on the Australasian Legal Information Institute (AustLII) website. ISSN ISSN 1839-2660 (Online) The ISSN for pre-digital (ie print) issues of CLR is 1320-6702.
  • Has the Evidence Act Been a Successful Codification? Is It a True Code?

    Has the Evidence Act Been a Successful Codification? Is It a True Code?

    Sarah Croxford Has the Evidence Act Been a Successful Codification? Is it a True Code? LLM RESEARCH PAPER LAWS 546: LEGISLATION FACULTY OF LAW 2015 II Sarah Croxford 300223766 Contents Abstract I Has the Evidence Act been a Successful Codification? Is it a True Code? A Introduction II Why the Law Change? A The Law was too Complex B Public Opinion III The Actions of the Law Commission IV What is the definition of a code? A Origin B Modern interpretation C Codification in Australia D Criminal Codification in the United Kingdom E The New Zealand Law Commissions Definition V What is the function of a code? What are its qualities? A A Fresh Start B Purpose and Principles C Gapless D Efficient E Legitimacy of Criminal Law F Society G But why then, are some People Against Codification? VI Jurisdictions A Australia B Canada C America D England E New Zealand II III Sarah Croxford 300223766 VII An analysis of the Evidence Act 2006 A Section 10 Interpretation – Are the Values of a Code Accomplished? 1 Section 10(1)(a) 2 Section 10(1)(b) 3 Section 10(1)(c) 4 The Law Commissions commentary B Purpose of the Act – Does this Achieve the Values and Advantages of a Code? 1 Section 6(b) 2 Section 6(c) 3 Section 6(e) 4 Section 6 (f) C Section 7 Relevance Principle – Does this Achieve the Values of a Code? D Section 8 Probative Value Principle – Does this Achieve the Values of a Code? E Section 12 Gapless – Does this Achieve the Values of a Code 1 Inclusion of the Common Law 2 Future Developments of Electronic Evidence F Section 5 Inconsistencies G Section 202 Periodic Review – Does this Achieve the Values of a Code? H Size VIII Changes due to the reform – Do these Achieve the Values of a Code? A Propensity B Improperly Obtained Evidence IX By and large has the Act and Codification been worthwhile? III IV Sarah Croxford 300223766 Abstract This paper examines the Evidence Act 2006 to determine whether it has been a successful codification of the law of evidence in New Zealand.