Encouraging a culture of justification: a comparison of Teoh and Baker

Focuses on the intersection of administrative law, international law, and universal human rights concepts in Australia and Canada. Comparison of  court decision between the cases involving Ah Hin Teoh and the Canadian  Minister of Citizenship and Immigration; Effect of the ratified United Nations  Convention on the Rights of the Child on administrative decisions; Judicial supervision of executive actions.

Baker v The Queen & Fardon v Attorney General for the State of Queensland

In 2004, the High Court of Australia had cause to revisit its 1996 decision in Kable, as well as to consider the nature of judicial power as it relates to the deprivation of liberty, outside of the parameters of conventional criminal sentencing. The resulting decisions of Fardon and Baker demonstrate the lack of constitutional protections afforded to people who become the focus of governmental campaigns to be "tough on crime". The so-called "Kable principle", as construed by the High Court in 2004, may prove to be the "constitutional watch dog that barks but once".

Beyond the separation of powers : judicial review and the regulatory proscription of terrorist organisations

Administrative law remains the key defence against an over-zealous executive arm of government, but administrative law needs to be understood in an international context. Perhaps nowhere is this more apparent than in relation to legislation designed to counter terrorist activities. The co-ordination of terrorist activities knows no borders, and state-centered executive action designed to address the threat of terrorism necessarily operates in a broader global environment. An important but controversial part of Australia's counter-terrorism legislation suite is the power to proscribe terrorist organisations. The authors contend that the scope of judicial review available in relation to decisions of the Commonwealth executive to proscribe terrorist organisations is inadequate and may jeapordise Australia's compliance with international standards, such as those provided in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Now is an opportune time to reassess the structure and operation of the power to proscribe organisations in Australia.

Regulatory and enabling approaches to corporate law enforcement : patterns of litigation 1986-2002 and the effect of recent reforms in New Zealand, Australia and the United Kingdom

Enforcement of corporate rights and duties may follow either a ‘regulatory’ or ‘enabling’ model. If a regulatory approach is taken, enforcement action will generally be undertaken by regulatory agencies such as, in New Zealand, the Registrar of Companies and Securities Commission, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) or the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) in the United Kingdom. If an enabling approach is chosen, enforcement action will more often be by private parties such as company shareholders, directors or creditors. When New Zealand's company law was reformed in 1993, a primarily private enforcement regime was adopted, consisting of a list of statutory directors' duties and an enhanced collection of shareholder remedies, based in part upon North American models and including a statutory derivative action. Public enforcement was largely confined to administrative matters and the enforcement of the disclosure requirements of New Zealand's securities law. While the previous enforcement regime was similarly reliant on private action, the law on directors' duties was less accessible, and shareholder action was hindered by the majority rule principle and the rule in Foss v Harbottle. This approach is in contrast with that used in Australia and the United Kingdom, where public agencies have a much more prominent enforcement role despite recent and proposed reforms to directors' duties and shareholder remedies. These reforms are designed to improve the ability of private parties to enforce corporate rights and duties. A survey of enforcement litigation in New Zealand since 1986 indicates that the object of a primarily enabling enforcement regime seems to have been achieved, and may well have been achieved even without the 1993 reform package. Private enforcement has, in fact, been much more prevalent than public enforcement since well before the enactment of the new legislation. Most enforcement action both before and after the reform was commenced by shareholders and shareholder/directors, and most involved closely held companies. Public enforcement was largely undertaken in areas such as securities law, where the wider public interest was affected. Similar surveys of Australian and United Kingdom enforcement litigation reveal a proportionally much greater reliance on public bodies to enforce corporate rights and duties, indicating a more regulatory approach. The ASIC and DTI enforced a wider range of provisions, affecting both closely and widely held companies, than those subject to public enforcement in New Zealand. Publicly enforced provisions in Australia and the United Kingdom include directors' duties and provisions dealing with disqualification from managing companies, as well as securities law requirements.

Intellectual property law in Southeast Asia : Recent legislative and institutional developments

Over the last few decades, countries belonging to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) all had to revise their intellectual property systems. These revisions resulted at first from bilateral pressure of major trading partners such as the US and EU, then from the WTO-TRIPS Agreement and more recently from bilateral Free Trade Agreements. To observe the IP developments in ASEAN over this period is interesting, because this group of countries covers developed (Singapore), developing as well as least developed countries. All countries had to reform their outdated laws from the colonial era in very short time. However, in comparison to the early 1980s, important differences with regards to intellectual property policies have emerged in recent years.

This article will briefly sketch the developments in individual ASEAN countries and after that examine some broader trends in law making, IP administration, enforcement and the court system. It concludes that the ASEAN enlargement process has created a very diverse picture with regards to IP. With the fast pace of the legislative development, countries have been struggling to keep up with the creation of the institutional and administrative framework. Progress in the ASEAN harmonisation process has been limited. Statistics indicate that some of the new laws have been reasonably well received at the domestic level, while the patent sector remains foreign dominated.

Child sexual abuse research: challenges of case tracking through administrative databases

Child sexual abuse has a serious impact on victims, their families and the broader community. As such, there is a critical need for sound research evidence to inform specialist responses. Increasingly, researchers are utilising administrative databases to track outcomes of individual cases across health, justice and other government agencies. There are unique advantages to this approach, including the ability to access a rich source of information at a population-wide level. However, the potential limitations of utilising administrative databases have not been fully explored. Because these databases were created originally for administrative rather than research purposes, there are significant problems with using this data at face value for research projects. We draw on our collective research experience in child sexual abuse to highlight common problems that have emerged when applying administrative databases to research questions. Some of the problems discussed include identification of relevant cases, ensuring reliability and dealing with missing data. Our article concludes with recommendations for researchers and policy-makers to enhance data quality.

Current issues in merger law

This collection of global perspectives will be of great interest to scholars and students of competition law, microeconomics, and regulatory studies.     This collection of global perspectives will be of great interest to scholars and students of competition law, microeconomics, and regulatory studies.
The globalization of markets, combined with the extraordinary expansion of merger control laws over the past two decades, has resulted in an increasing number of mergers inviting multiple regulatory responses. This has had a significant impact on the complexity, time and cost associated with transnational mergers and has highlighted the differences in law, policy and procedure employed by more than 70 jurisdictions now adopting targeted merger regimes. By contrast with other areas of competition law and policy, the treatment of mergers involves a significant regulatory component, with most jurisdictions adopting ex ante notification and suspension obligations for mergers exceeding defined thresholds. The justification for this lies in the structural change to the market affected by the merging of assets, personnel and intellectual property, which are difficult to reverse. However, ex ante regulation also has the consequence of subjecting the vast majority of benign or beneficial mergers to the cost and delay associated with administrative scrutiny. This cost and delay has the potential to jeopardize time-sensitive transactions or postpone expected efficiency gains. Where markets extend beyond domestic borders, these costs are multiplied and the slowest and most prescriptive jurisdiction will influence or determine the time at which the merger can close, if at all, and on what conditions.