Contract Law Case Book [2nd ed.]

This case book contains the essential sections of the most significant cases in Australian contract law. Ready access to this collection of cases enables students to experience the law through the judges’ own words, and to develop the skills of interpreting and analysing cases in order to refine their understanding of the law. Excerpts from important statutes and writings are also included.

National electronic conveyancing : outline of national law and rules

This article will outline the impact of the Electronic Conveyancing National Law (ECNL) and the draft Model Participation Rules (MPR) on conveyancing practice and the obligations of lawyers and conveyancers.

Lifting the joint venture veil : liability of related entities for misleading conduct of agents engaged by joint venture partners

At common law, a corporation may be liable vicariously for the conduct of its appointed agents, employees or directors. This generally requires the agent or employee to be acting in the course of his or her agency or employment and, in the case of representations, to have actual or implied authority to make the representations. The circumstances in which a corporation may be liable for the conduct of its agents, employees or directors is broadened under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) to where one of these parties engages in conduct “on behalf of” the corporation. As the decision in Bennett v Elysium Noosa Pty Ltd (in liq) demonstrates, this may extend to liability for the misleading conduct of a salesperson for the joint venture to parties who are not formal members of the joint venture, but where the joint venture activities are within the course of the entity’s “business, affairs or activities”.

Is providing elective ventilation in the best interests of potential donors?

In this paper, we examine the lawfulness of a proposal to provide elective ventilation to incompetent patients who are potential organ donors. Under the current legal framework, this depends on whether the best interests test could be satisfied. It might be argued that, because the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (UK) (and the common law) makes it clear that the best interests test is not confined to the patient's clinical interests, but extends to include the individual's own values, wishes and beliefs, the proposal will be in the patient's best interests. We reject this claim. We argue that, as things currently stand, the proposal could not lawfully be justified as a blanket proposition by reference to the best interests test. Accordingly, a modification of the law would be necessary to render the proposal lawful. We conclude with a suggestion about how that could be achieved.

The Role of the Judiciary in Earth Jurisprudence : An Analysis of Judicial Approaches to Standing in Climate Change and Environmental Justice Litigation

The role of the judiciary in common law systems is to create law, interpret law and uphold the law. As such decisions by courts on matters related to ecologically sustainable development, natural resource use and management and climate change make an important contribution to earth jurisprudence. There are examples where judicial decisions further the goals of earth jurisprudence and examples where decisions go against the principles of earth jurisprudence. This presentation will explore judicial approaches to standing in Australia and America. The paper will explore two trends in each jurisdiction. Approaches by American courts to standing will be examined in reference to climate change and environmental justice litigation. While Australian approaches to standing will be examined in the context of public interest litigation and environmental criminal negligence cases. The presentation will draw some conclusions about the role of standing in each of these cases and implications of this for earth jurisprudence.

Volunteers 'piggy-backing' on their private insurance : an uncertain protection against liability

Volunteering is a very important part of life in Australia with an estimated 36% of the adult population volunteering in 2010. Voluntary work generates economic benefits, addresses community needs and develops the social networks that form the backbone of civil society. Without volunteers, many essential services would either cease to exist or become too expensive for many people to afford. These volunteers, who by definition are not in receipt of any remuneration for their work and services, are exposed to personal injury and to legal liability in the discharge of their functions. It is therefore appropriate that statutory protection is extended to volunteers and that volunteer organisations procure public liability and personal accident cover where possible. However, given the patchwork quilt of circumstances where statutory or institutional cover is available to volunteers and the existence of many and diverse exclusions, it is important to have regard also to what scope a volunteer may have to avail themselves of protection against liability for volunteering activity by relying upon their own personal insurance cover. This article considers the extent of private insurance cover and its availability to volunteers under home and contents insurance and under comprehensive motor vehicle insurance. The most common policies in the Australian market are examined and the uncertain nature of protection against liability afforded by these policies is discussed. This uncertainty could be reduced should the Federal Government through amendments to the Insurance Contracts Regulations standardise the circumstances and extent to which liability protection was afforded to an insured holding home and contents insurance and comprehensive motor vehicle insurance cover.

Judicial intervention in the affairs of unincorporated religious associations in New South Wales

The leading Australian High Court case of Cameron v Hogan (1934) 51 CLR 358 confirmed that associations which are 'social, sporting, political, scientific, religious, artistic or humanitarian in character’, and not formed ‘for private gain or material advantage’, are usually formed on a basis of mutual consent. Unless there is some clear, positive indication that the members wish to relate to each other in a legal fashion, the rules of the association will not be treated as an enforceable contract in contrast to the rules of incorporated bodies. Australian unincorporated associations experiencing internal disputes, like those in most other common law jurisdictions, have found courts reluctant to provide a remedy unless there is a proprietary interest or trust to protect. This is further compounded by the judicial view that an unincorporated association has no legal recognition as a ‘juristic person’. The right to hold property and the ability to sue and be sued are incidences of this recognition. By contrast, the law recognises ‘artificial’ legal persons such as corporations, who are given rights to hold property and to sue and be sued. However, when a number of individuals associate together for a non-commercial, lawful purpose, but not by way of a corporate structure, legal recognition ‘as a group’ is denied. Since 1934, a significant number of cases have distinguished or otherwise declined to follow this precedent of the High Court. A trenchant criticism is found in McKinnon v Grogan [1974] 1 NSWLR 295, 298 where Wootten J said that ‘citizens are entitled to look to the courts for the same assistance in resolving disputes about the conduct of sporting, political and social organisations as they can expect in relation to commercial institutions’. According to Wootten J at 298, if disputes are not settled by the courts, this would create a ‘legal-no-man's land, in which disputes are settled not in accordance with justice and the fulfilment of deliberately undertaken obligations, but by deceit, craftiness, and an arrogant disregard of rights’. Cameron v Hogan was decided in 1934. There is an increasing volume of first instance cases which distinguish or, in the words of Palmer J, ‘just pay lip service’ to this High Court decision. (Coleman v Liberal Party of Australia (2007) 212 FLR 271, 278). The dissenting cases seem to call for a judicial policy initiative. This would require recognition by judges that voluntary associations play a significant role in society and that members have a legitimate, enforceable expectation that the rules of the association will be observed by members and in the last resort, enforced by the courts without the need to prove contractual intention, the existence of a trust or the existence of a right of a proprietary nature. This thesis asks: what legal, as distinct from political, redress does an ordinary member have, when a rule is made or a process followed which is contrary to the underlying doctrines and philosophies embodied in the constitutional documents of an unincorporated religious association? When, if at all, will a court intervene to ensure doctrinal purity or to supervise the daily life of a large unincorporated religious association? My research objective is to examine and analyse leading cases and relevant legislation on the enforceability of the constitutions of large, unincorporated, religious associations with particular reference to the Anglican Church in New South Wales. Given its numerical size, wide geographical spread and presence since the foundation of New South Wales, the Anglican Church in New South Wales, contains a sufficient variety of ‘real life’ situations to be representative of the legal issues posed by Cameron v Hogan which may be faced by other large, unincorporated, religious associations in New South Wales. In contemporary society, large, unincorporated, religious associations play an important community role. The resolution of internal disputes in such associations should not remain captive to legal doctrines of an earlier age.

Regulating the coal industry : striking a balance between commercial and public interests - a Queensland case study

The coal industry in Queensland operates in a very complex regulatory environment with a matrix of Federal and State laws covering the environment, health and safety, taxation and royalties, tenure, and development approvals. The Queensland Government in 2012 recognised the validity of certain industry concerns and passed two Acts being the Environmental Protection (Greentape Reduction) Amendment Act 2012 (the Greentape Act) and the Mines Legislation (Streamlining) Amendment Act 2012 (the Streamlining Act). Other changes are foreshadowed in relation to overlapping tenure and in the development of common resources legislation. Accordingly there is a great level of activity and change that has occurred or which is on the horizon. This article focuses upon these regulatory changes and foreshadows other areas requiring consideration. It commences with a consideration of the changes that have already occurred, examines those regulatory amendments that are on the drawing board and concludes with suggestions as to further interventions and amendments that have the potential to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the legislative framework in which coal mining is conducted.

Wrongful birth : assessment of damages in 2013

More than 10 years have passed since the High Court of Australia confirmed the recoverability of damages for the cost of raising a child, in the well-known decision in Cattanach v Melchior. Yet a number of aspects of the assessment of such “wrongful birth” damages had not been the subject of a comprehensive court ruling. The recent decision in Waller v James was widely anticipated as potentially providing a comprehensive discussion of the principles relevant to the assessment of damages in wrongful birth cases. However, given a finding on causation adverse to the plaintiffs, the trial judge held that it was unnecessary to determine the quantum of damages. Justice Hislop did, however, make some comments in relation to the assessment of damages. This article focuses mostly on the argued damages issues relating to the costs of raising the child and the trial judge’s comments regarding the same. The Waller v James claim was issued before the enactment of the Health Care Liability Act 2001 (NSW) and the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW). Although the case was therefore decided according to the “common law”, as explained below, his Honour’s comments may be of relevance to more recent claims governed by the civil liability legislation in New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia.

What the plaintiff would have done in informed consent cases

Both at common law and under the various civil liability acts, in deciding liability for breach of duty, the plaintiff always bears the onus of proving, on the balance of probabilities, any fact relevant to the issue of causation. For plaintiffs in medical negligence claims founded on negligent failure to provide sufficient information (informed consent cases), this onus involves persuading the court to make a favourable determination as to what a particular patient would have done (from a subjective perspective) in the hypothetical situation of the defendant not being negligent (that is, in the event that the medical practitioner had provided sufficient information to the patient)

Why ADR must be a mandatory subject in the law degree - the academy

The profession of law is deeply steeped in tradition and conservatism. The content and pedagogy employed in law faculties across Australia is similarly steeped in tradition and conservatism. Indeed, the practice of law and our institutions of legal education are in a relationship of mutual influence; a dénouement which preserves the best aspects of our common law legal system, but also leaves the way we educate, practice, and think about the role of law, resistant to change. In this article, we lay down a challenge to legal education orthodoxy and a call to arms for legal academic progressivists. It is our simple argument that alternative dispute resolution should be a compulsory, stand alone subject in the law degree. There has been traditional pushback against the notion that alternative dispute resolution should have a place amongst black letter law subjects in the legal curriculum. This position cannot be maintained in the modern day legal climate. We put forward ten simple arguments as to why every law student should be exposed to a semester long course of ADR instruction. With respect to relationships of mutual influence, whether legal education should assimilate the practise of law, or shape the practise of law makes no difference here. Both views necessitate the inclusion of ADR as a compulsory subject in the law degree.

Constitutional Law

"This book systematically explores and clarifies the complexities of Austrealian Constitutional law and provides valuable critical analysis suitable for students, academics and government departments." -- book cover "Constitutional Law examines the foundational principles and concepts of this area of law. Written by practicing lawyers and lecturers in the subject, this book aims to provide an accessible yet comprehensive introductory text for Australian students. In eight parts this book systematically explores and clarifies the complexities of Australian Constitutional law and provides valuable critical analysis suitable for students, academics and government departments. An excellent resource for law students, Constitutional Law provides visual summaries in the form of flow charts, and each chapter includes key concepts and end-of-chapter discussion questions, further reading and useful websites and links. It also introduces students to key examinable areas, legal style essays, problems and assessment." -- publisher website

Assessment of damages for wrongful birth and consolidation in advance care directives

The recent decision of Waller v James involved a claim by the plaintiff parents for damages for wrongful birth against the defendant doctor, Dr James, a gynaecologist with a practice in infertility and IVF procedures, who had been consulted by the plaintiffs. The second plaintiff, Mr Waller suffered an inherited anti-thrombin deficiency (ATD), a condition which results in a propensity for the blood to clot, at least in adults. Dr James subsequently recommended IVF treatment. The first plaintiff, Mrs Waller became pregnant after the first cycle of IVF treatment. Her son Keeden was born on 10 August 2000 with a genetic anti-thrombin deficiency. Keeden was released from hospital on 14 August 2000. However, he was brought back to the hospital the next day with cerebral thrombosis (CSVT). As a result of the thrombosis, he suffered permanent brain damage, cerebral palsy and related disabilities. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant was in breach of contract and his common law duty of care to the plaintiffs in failing to inform them, or cause them to be informed, of the hereditary aspects of ATD. They further alleged that, had they been properly informed, they would not have proceeded to conceive a child using the male plaintiff’s sperm and therefore avoided the harm that had befallen them. The plaintiffs claimed damages to compensate them for their losses, including psychiatric and physical injuries and the costs of having, raising and caring for Keeden. The defendant was held to be not liable in negligence by Justice Hislop of the Supreme Court of New South Wales because a finding was made on medical causation which was adverse to the plaintiffs claim.

The state of the art defence : defining the Australian experience in the context of pharmaceuticals

One of the defences within Part 3-5 of the Australian Consumer Law is the state of the art, or development risk defence. This defence, although significant, has often been neglected in Australian jurisprudential analysis and has triggered at most generic academic analysis. However, with the rise of pharmaceutical and medical device litigation in Australia, it could become a vital weapon for Australian manufacturers against product liability claims. This paper will firstly review the two ways this defence could operate. It will also discuss the three types of defects which the defence could apply to. This paper aims to determine exactly when and how this defence should apply in Australia, in the context of pharmaceutical product liability claims.

The covenant for quiet enjoyment : a potential nuisance to lessors

Under Australian law, a tenant complaining of nuisance caused by another tenant traditionally had no recourse to the lessor unless the lessor actively participated in the nuisance. A recent Queensland Court of Appeal decision, Aussie Traveller Pty Ltd v Marklea Pty Ltd, has found that a lessor who fails to take steps to control a tenant's nuisance may be liable to other tenants for breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment. This paper considers the recent decision in light of common law developments in Australia, England and the United States, including the American concept of constructive eviction.