Crime risks of three-dimensional virtual environments

Three-dimensional virtual environments (3dves) are the new generation of digital multi-user social networking platforms. Their immersive character allows users to create a digital humanised representation or avatar, enabling a degree of virtual interaction not possible through conventional text-based internet technologies. As recent international experience demonstrates, in addition to the conventional range of cybercrimes (including economic fraud, the dissemination of child pornography and copyright violations), the 'virtual-reality' promoted by 3dves is the source of great speculation and concern over a range of specific and emerging forms of crime and harm to users. This paper provides some examples of the types of harm currently emerging in 3dves and suggests internal regulation by user groups, terms of service, or end-user licensing agreements, possibly linked to real-world criminological principles. This paper also provides some directions for future research aimed at understanding the role of Australian criminal law and the justice system more broadly in this emerging field.

Trade-off manipulations in the development of negotiation decision support systems

Our model of negotiation for constructing Negotiation Decision Support Systems is based upon Principled Negotiation and uses trade-off manipulations in order to provide decision support. A resulting system, Family_Winner, was constructed using several information systems techniques. Trade-off Maps (a variant of Constraint Diagrams) are used to represent trade-off opportunities, while an empirically derived formula calculates the amount of compensation given to the ratings of issues remaining in dispute. The Issue Decomposition Hierarchy embedded in the system allows for the incorporation of sub-issues. Family_Winner was originally built for use in Australian Family Law. We believe our model can be extended for use in various other domains.

Family_Winner has been evaluated in the areas of industrial relations, international disputation and company disputes. Results from our evaluation suggest the system works satisfactorily in these domains. We conclude this paper by describing future projects that will develop and extend Family_Winner's functions and applicability.

Incorporating fairness into development of an integrated multi-agent online dispute resolution environment

The paper describes the development of an integrated multi-agent online dispute resolution environment called IMODRE that was designed to assist parties involved in Australian family law disputes achieve legally fairer negotiated outcomes. The system extends our previous work in developing negotiation support systems Family_Winner and AssetDivider. In this environment one agent uses a Bayesian Belief Network expertly modeled with knowledge of the Australian Family Law domain to advise disputants of their Best Alternatives to Negotiated Agreements. Another agent incorporates the percentage split of marital property into an integrative bargaining process and applies heuristics and game theory to equitably distribute marital property assets and facilitate further trade-offs. We use this system to add greater fairness to Family property law negotiations.

Keeping gender on the agenda : theorising the systematic barriers to women lawyers in corporate legal practice

Despite the implementation of policies and procedures to redress the gender imbalance at the higher echelons in Australian corporate law firms, only a paucity of women successfully tread the path to equity partnership. In this article, it is argued that it is the systemic, rather than the overt, barriers that present the major obstacle to sexual equality within the corporate legal workplace. Neo-Marxian thought, in particular the work of Charles Derber on the proletarianisation of professional workers, as well as contemporary feminist thought, is utilised to explore why profoundly gendered assumptions in relation to the 'ideal worker' norm remain deeply embedded in the mindsets and attitudes of those organising the legal workplace. It is suggested that fear of change to work practices within firms has not only an ideological but also a material base. It is economically determined. Highly trained women lawyers with family work responsibilities who take up flexible work arrangements in firms are fulfilling a proletarian role and their under-utilised labour is being extracted to increase profit share at the apex and facilitate the progress of their unencumbered colleagues along the path to partnership.

Professional legal education reviews : too many 'what's, too few 'how's

Former colonies of the British Empire, Hong Kong and Australia inherited the common law system and the basic structure of legal education and training from England and Wales and remain the closest siblings in terms of proximity in distance and the high degree of similarity between their respective frameworks for legal education and training. This article first summarizes the major reviews of legal education and training in these three jurisdictions: England and Wales, Australia and Hong Kong over the last four decades and argues that while these reviews are keen on investigating ‘what’ is lacking in the curriculum and ‘what’ needs to be changed to equip graduates for the challenges of the day, they do not seem to have shown the same level of enthusiasm in identifying ‘how’ the intended outcomes prescribed can be achieved. Nevertheless, law schools in these jurisdictions recently began to tap on, and combine with the improved classroom pedagogy, clinical legal education and internship, innovative teaching tools and solutions in an attempt to deliver more enhanced learning experience to students. The article examines the role ascribed to technology in legal education and training with a particular reference to SimPLE, a e-learning platform developed in England and Wales which has been put to use in Australia as well, and the reform initiatives taken, and planned to be taken, by the Department of Professional Legal Education at the University of Hong Kong in its Postgraduate Certificate in Laws programme. This article concludes by pointing out the importance of collaboration among stakeholders including teachers, university administration and the legal profession in effecting a more active role of technology in legal education and training of today.

Thabo Meli revisited : the pernicious effects of results-driven decisions

Despite the hackneyed expression that ‘judges should interpret the law and not make it’, the fact remains that there is some scope within the separation of powers doctrine for the courts to develop the common law incrementally. To this extent, the courts can effectively legislate, but only to this limited extent if they are to respect the separation of powers doctrine. On occasion, however, the courts have usurped the power entrusted to Parliament, and particularly so in instances where a strict application of the existing law would lead to results that offend their personal notions of what is fair and just. When this occurs, the natural consequence is that lawyers, academics and the public in general lose respect for both the judges involved as well as the adversarial system of criminal justice. In order to illustrate this point, attention will focus on the case of Thabo Meli v United Kingdom in which the Privy Council, mistakenly believing that it could not reach its desired outcome through a strict application of the common law rule of temporal coincidence, emasculated the rule beyond recognition in order to convict the accused. Moreover, the discussion to follow will demonstrate that not only was the court wrong in its belief that the case involved the doctrine of temporal coincidence, but the same result would have been achieved had the Council correctly identified the issue as one of legal causation and correctly applied the principles relating thereto.

The Queen v Getachew : rethinking DPP v Morgan

In The Queen v Getachew, a recent decision of the High Court of Australia that was soon followed by the Victorian Court of Appeal, the High Court correctly noted that there is a fine line between the mens reas of belief and knowledge which turns upon the degree of conviction with which a belief is held. In particular, the court emphasised that a belief in the existence of a fact or circumstance that contemplates a real possibility or perhaps a higher degree of doubt as to the existence of that fact or circumstance is tantamount to knowledge or awareness that such fact or circumstance may not exist. When applied to the principle enunciated in DPP v Morgan, that type of belief would not be mutually exclusive with the alternative mens reas that require the Crown to prove that the accused was aware that the complainant was not or might not be consenting to the penetration at issue. In Getachew, the High Court merely pointed out that the mens reas of knowledge and belief, though similar in certain respects, are separate and distinct mental states that were incorrectly and inexplicably treated as though they were identical in Morgan and innumerable decisions that have followed and relied upon Morgan since it was decided by the House of Lords in 1976. In the aftermath of Getachew, therefore, the principle that an accused can act with a mental state that is mutually exclusive of the mens rea for rape remains intact. What has changed is that it is knowledge, rather than a mere belief that the complainant is not or might not be consenting, that is mutually exclusive of the requisite mens rea for rape.

The novel as social satire: 60 years later, the wind done gone and the limitations of fair use

The absence of the doctrine of fair use from Australian copyright law has been a bone of contention in Australia after the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement (FTA). As the Australian government reformed the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) in the aftermath of the FTA it eschewed the option of adopting fair use. Instead, Australia chose to incorporate a version of fair use into its existing fair dealing framework. Accordingly, the Copyright Amendment Act 2006 (Cth) inserted ss 41A and 103AA into the Copyright Act. These provisions provide that a fair dealing with a copyright protected work does not constitute an infringement if it is done for the purposes of parody or satire. These provisions codify part of the ratio of the United States Supreme Court in the seminal case of Campbell v Acuff Rose Music. However, the parameters of these new provisions are unexplored and the sparse nature of fair dealing jurisprudence means that the true meaning of the provisions is unclear. Moreover, two cases from the United States, SunTrust Bank v Houghton Mifflin and Salinger v Colting, underline just how important it is to have legal rules that protect literary ‘re-writes’. Both cases involved authors using an original novel to ‘write back’ to the original author and the broader culture. ‘Writing back’ or the ‘re-write’ has a firm basis in literature. It adds something invaluable to our culture. The key question is whether our legal landscape can allow it to flourish. This paper examines the interaction between fair use and literary re-writes.

Workers, a neglected voice in environmental decisions

The European Aarhus Convention is the only public law convention devoted to public participation in environmental matters. The Convention has application broadly to Australia as many of the Convention’s provisions are reflected in Australian environmental law. The Convention has an ambitious aim being, to engage civil society in effective public participation at all levels of environmental decision-making. Trade unions and workers as members of civil society are granted rights under the Aarhus Convention to participate in environmental decisions. However in spite of this, the trade union movement has largely ignored the Convention. This article examines the potential rights which the Convention grants to trade unions and workers and explores the broader debate regarding the involvement of unions in environmental matters.

Police Misconduct as a Breach of Public trust: the Offence of Misconduct in Public Office

Until relatively recently, the common law offence of misconduct in public office has been regarded as anachronistic. The offence was perceived to have been supplanted by specific statutory offences that could more appropriately deal with criminal conduct by public officials. However, there has been a revival of the offence with successful prosecutions occurring in Australia, England and Hong Kong. Many of these contemporary cases have involved police officers. Examination of these cases reveals that the circumstances in which misconduct in public office has been identified have been diverse, including the unauthorised disclosure of confidential information, the use of false search warrants and the sexual exploitation of vulnerable persons. In many instances, police officers were charged with other criminal offences in addition to charges relating to misconduct in public office. The matters prosecuted as misconduct in public office typically involved matters that were serious and/or could not be adequately prosecuted as other criminal offences or as breaches of police regulations governing conduct. Consequently, despite the proliferation of statutory criminal offences in the 20th century it appears that there continues to be a place for the offence of misconduct in public office. It criminalises misconduct by police officers that may not be adequately dealt with by other offences and recognises the public trust dimension of wrongdoing by these officials. However, a continuing and fundamental challenge is to determine the appropriate definition and scope of the offence.

The principle of legality as clear statement rule: significance and problems

In Australia, the common law principle of legality has hardened into a strong clear statement rule that is applied when legislation engages common law rights and freedoms. It has transformed a loose collection of rebuttable interpretive presumptions into a quasi-constitutional common law bill of rights. However, these developments are not without controversy or issue. The analysis undertaken in this article suggests that the principle of legality as clear statement rule -- as mandated by the High Court in Coco v The Queen -- can only work legitimately if Parliament has clear and prior notice of the rights and freedoms that it operates to protect. But it is problematic if what a common law right, such as freedom of speech, requires or guarantees in any given legislative context is unclear and contested, and so must be judicially divined at the point of application. In these cases, the principle operates to enforce a (post-legislative) judicial approximation of what best protects and promotes an abstract legal value or principle. It amounts to the illegitimate judicial remaking of prior legislative decisions on rights. This undercuts the normative justifications for the principle of legality as it obscures from Parliament the common law (rights) backdrop against which its legislation is enacted and interpreted.

R v Middendorp

This book brings together feminist academics, lawyers and activists to present an impressive collection of alternative judgments in a series of Australian legal cases.

Rethinking the employer's summary dismissal power in the employment contract

 The principal subject of this thesis is the employer’s summary dismissal power under Australian contract law. Summary dismissal is by far the most brutal way that an employment relationship may end. Its suddenness can have long-lasting economic and psychological impacts upon the dismissed employee. However, the area has been neglected in legal scholarship. The result of this is that issues arising from the jurisprudence have not been the subject of critique and scrutiny, until now. This thesis addresses this gap in the scholarship. The thesis also proposes a new approach to resolving these disputes based on the proportionality concept. An employer's decision to dismiss its employees in this way should be commensurate to the detriment caused by the employee's actions. Therefore, one 'should not use a sledgehammer to crack a nut.'