Homing devices in choice of Tort Law: Australian, British and Canadian Approaches

Since 1994, Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia have adopted new choice of law rules for cross-border torts that, in different ways, centre on the application of the law of the place where the tort occurred (the lex loci delicti). All three countries abandoned some species of the rule in Phillips v Eyre, which required some reference to the law of the forum (the lex fori) as well as the lex loci delicti. However, predictions were made that, where possible, courts in these countries would continue to show a strong inclination to apply the lex fori in cross-border tort cases - and would use a range of homing devices to do so. A comprehensive survey and analysis of the cases that have been decided under the Australian, British and Canadian lex loci delicti regimes suggests that courts in these countries do betray a homing instinct, but one that has actually been tightly restrained by appeal courts. Where application of the lex fori was formally allowed by use of a 'flexible exception' in Canada and the United Kingdom, this has been contained by courts of first appeal. Indeed, only the continuing characterization of the assessment of damages as a procedural question in Canada and the United Kingdom, seems to remain as a significant homing device for courts in these countries. © 2006 Oxford University Press.

Approaches to environmental noise policy in Australia

Australia is a federation of six states and two territories. Legislation for environmental noise is the responsibility of each of the Australian states and territories. The Federal government has the responsibility for national issues such as aircraft noise and also to encourage harmonisation of the legislation and regulations among the states and territories. For some decades there has been a document on environmental noise produced by Standards Australia but it is up to each state or territory to call up part or all of this Standard. For general environmental noise some states use comparison with background as the criteria while others define the criteria levels based on land use zones. Both approaches have their advantages and drawbacks. This paper will compare and contrast the different legislation and regulations and discuss the issue of 'cross border' disputes.

Border Patrol in the Borderless World: Negotiating Intercultural Internet Discussion

Public Internet discussion forums appear to offer limitless opportunities for communication across linguistic, geographical and cultural borders. Closer inspection, however, reveals that cordial intercultural exchanges are far from widespread in this genre. And yet, such forums have a great deal to offer the independent language learner in terms of ease of access, potential for meaningful language practice and feedback, and exposure to different cultural conventions. This paper explores obstacles to the participation of advanced language learners in public forums of this kind through an examination of the speaking positions most readily available to the non-native speaker. A case study of sustained intercultural interaction on a public discussion thread suggests an alternative to these. Here a core of Francophone and Anglophone participants manage to negotiate an intercultural identity in order to pursue their communicative goals. The paper traces the way in which participants shift footing to regulate insider and outsider status on the forum and draws conclusions regarding the conditions for successful intercultural exchange in this genre