Pleading for privilege : Denials and non-admissions under the UCPR

The decision in ASIC v Managed Investments Ltd No 3 [2012] QSC 74 provides practitioners with useful guidance on the relationship between the privileges against self-incrimination and exposure to a penalty, and the UCPR requirements for denials and non-admissions.

Practice and Procedure: UCPR r 708 - costs order against several defendants and third party

Glenwood Homes Pty Ltd v Everhard [2008] QSC 192 involved the not uncommon situation where one costs order is made against several parties represented by a single firm of solicitors. Dutney J considered the implications when only some of the parties liable for the payment of the costs file a notice of objection to the costs statement served in respect of those costs.

Teaching Teachers for the Future (TTF) project TPACK Survey : summary of the key findings

This paper presents a summary of the key findings of the TTF TPACK Survey developed and administered for the Teaching the Teachers for the Future (TTF) Project implemented in 2011. The TTF Project, funded by an Australian Government ICT Innovation Fund grant, involved all 39 Australian Higher Education Institutions which provide initial teacher education. TTF data collections were undertaken at the end of Semester 1 (T1) and at the end of Semester 2 (T2) in 2011. A total of 12881 participants completed the first survey (T1) and 5809 participants completed the second survey (T2). Groups of like-named items from the T1 survey were subject to a battery of complementary data analysis techniques. The psychometric properties of the four scales: Confidence - teacher items; Usefulness - teacher items; Confidence - student items; Usefulness- student items, were confirmed both at T1 and T2. Among the key findings summarised, at the national level, the scale: Confidence to use ICT as a teacher showed measurable growth across the whole scale from T1 to T2, and the scale: Confidence to facilitate student use of ICT also showed measurable growth across the whole scale from T1 to T2. Additional key TTF TPACK Survey findings are summarised.

Metacognitive therapy for alcohol abuse and dependence

While the consumption of alcohol has been part of the collective psyche of Australians since colonisation, the overconsumption of alcohol has been and continues to be a significant problem for the Australian community. Currently motivational interviewing and cognitive behaviour therapy are seen as the two standard psychological interventions for alcohol abuse and dependence. While these two approaches have shown significant impact on reducing alcohol abuse and dependence, they are not without their limitations. As such there is a need to continue to explore the application of newer developments in psychotherapy to the treatment problematic drinking behaviours. In this chapter we propose that Metacognitive Therapy is one such psychotherapy that is likely to provide a promising new approach to the treatment of alcohol abuse and dependence. In this chapter we will first briefly outline the history and significance of problematic drinking behaviours in Australia. Following this, we will quickly summarise the literature regarding motivational interviewing and cognitive behaviour therapy. Next we will provide an outline of the theoretical framework of Metacognitive Therapy and then describe two brief case studies illustrating the application of Metacognitive Therapy to the treatment of alcohol abuse and dependence. From this discussion we propose that the combination of Motivational Interviewing and Metacognitive Therapy is a promising new approach that can provide great assistance for the treatment of alcohol abuse or dependence.

Federal Court Rules O23 r 11 - offers of compromise - offer for dismissal of claim and to forego recovery of costs.

In Uniline Australia Ltd ACN 010752057 v S Briggs Pty Ltd ACN 007415518 (No 2) [2009] FCA 920 Greenwood J considered a number of principles guiding the exercise of discretion in relation to costs, particularly when offers of compromise have been made under the formal process provided by the Federal Court Rules.

Full circle on costs

This article considers the implications of the decision in Paroz v Clifford Gouldson Lawyers [2012] QDC 151, which examined provisions of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) dealing with costs disclosure and assessment, and also considered associated provisions of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld).

Court overrides costs assessment limits

This article considers the implications for Queensland practitioners of the decision of the New South Wales Court of Appeal in Branson v Tucker [2012] NSWCA 310. That decision involved the question whether the court retained a jurisdiction to examine the reasonableness of costs charged by a barrister, who had entered a costs agreement with solicitors, in circumstances where where had been no application under the Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW) for an assessment of the costs the subject of the bill and it was no longer possible for such an application to be made.

Offer to settle a taxing question

This article considers the implications of the decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court in Commissioner of Taxation v Clark (No 2). In that case the Court examined the position of the Commissioner of Taxation as a litigant. In particular, the court examined the significance of the commissioner's duty to administer taxation legislation on the court's exercise of discretion relating to costs orders when offers to settle have been made.

Fatal flaws : the risks for beneficiaries who assist a suicide

The recent criminal conviction of Queensland teacher Merin Nielsen for aiding the suicide of an elderly acquaintance, Frank Ward, raises some timely issues, particularly for succession lawyers.

Practice and Procedure : UCPR r 95

In Energex Limited v Sablatura [2009] QSC 356 the difficulty facing the applicant related not to its substantive rights, but to its ability to vindicate those rights without an effective respondent to the application. The case highlights issues that may confront an applicant or plaintiff in vindicating rights it may have against a person who is or becomes under a legal incapacity, if there is no-one other than the Public Trustee able to act as litigation guardian.

Practice and Procedure : Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld) ss 131 and 237(1)

In Jacobs v Woolworths Limited [2010] QSC 24 Jones J was required to determine whether a worker who had lodged an application for compensation for an injury outside the time prescribed under the Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld) (“the Act”) was precluded from seeking common law damages for that injury. This determination depended upon the proper construction of s 131 of the Act, and what was to be understood by the words “worker who has not lodged an application for compensation for the injury” for the purpose of s 237(1)(d).

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules r150 : orders relating to "property" – whether sperm extracted and stored may be characterised as “property”

In Bazley v Wesley Monash IVF Pty Ltd [2010] QSC 118 an order was made under r 250 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) (“UCPR”) requiring the respondent to continue to hold and maintain straws of semen belonging to the applicant’s deceased husband. The decision includes a useful analysis of the development of the common law regarding property rights in human bodies and body parts.

Legal Profession Act 2007 : entitlement to itemised bill – meaning of “client” – meaning of “third party payer”

In Legal Services Commissioner and Wright [2010] QSC 168 and Amos v Ian K Fry & Company, the Supreme Court of Queensland considered the scope of some of the provisions of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld), including the definition of “third party payer” in s 301 of the Act.

Arbitration proceeding – determination of “market price” – subpoena under Commercial Arbitration Act 1990 s 17

AGL Wholesale Gas Ltd v Origin Energy Ltd [2008] QCA 366 involved an appeal against the setting aside of paragraphs of a subpoena issued under s 17 of the Commercial Arbitration Act 1990 (Qld). The Court was satisfied that even if the documents were of “apparent relevance” to the subject matter of the proceedings, it would nevertheless be oppressive to require their production.