Perceived environmental aesthetics and convenience and company are associated with walking for exercise among Australian adults

Background: This study aimed to investigate relationships between environmental aesthetics, convenience, and walking companions and walking for exercise or recreation and to investigate differences in these relationships by sex and by reported physical and mental health.

Methods: Analyses of cross-sectional self-report data from a statewide population survey of 3,392 Australian adults were used.

Results: Men and women reporting a less aesthetically pleasing or less convenient environment were less likely to report walking for exercise or recreation in the past 2 weeks. Those respondents, particularly women, reporting no company or pet to walk with were also less likely to walk for exercise or recreation. Associations with environmental and social influences were observed for men and women reporting both good and poor physical and mental health.

Conclusions: Perceived environmental aesthetics and convenience and walking companions are important correlates of walking for exercise among urban Australians. Acknowledging the cross-sectional nature of these data, findings support a case for evaluation of environmental policies to promote physical activity.

An examination of the joint venture market entry option in China : a case study of an Australian company's international marketing experience in China

There is a widely held view in the literature that foreign companies looking to invest in the China market should opt for joint ventures rather than wholly foreign-owned enterprises for many reasons, ranging from a smaller capital commitment to utilising the market knowledge of local Chinese partners. This paper examines this issue in the light of the experience of the Foster's Brewing Group which established three joint ventures in China only to reject this form of market entry option within a few years. The paper looks at some of the reasons behind Foster's rejection of the joint venture option and proposes some key guidelines that foreign companies should follow if they are to successfully establish joint ventures in China.

Managers' views on ABC in an insurance company: A grounded theory case study

This is an in-depth case study using a grounded theory approach to explore managers’ views of ABC as part of the control system in an insurance company. Relevant issues are allowed to emerge from the data rather than imposing a theoretical framework upon them. Hypotheses are derived rather than confirmed. Issues emerging from this case study include: the relevance of ABC to managers, increased cost awareness coupled with the problem of taking qualitative factors into account, and the existence of different perceptions of managers within the same department. One hypothesis is how an understanding of ABC can affect job satisfaction by influencing the impact of ABC on managers’ actions. In this case study process and non-process managers had different levels of understanding and use of ABC information. A second hypothesis is that how managers view ABC information depends on whether they adopt a personal or an organisational perspective.

The times are they a-changin'? Can the Commonwealth parliament legislate for same sex marriages?

This article considers whether the marriage power contained in the Australian Constitution could support a Commonwealth law that recognised same sex marriages. To this end and after outlining the current constitutional meaning according to the High Court, three methods used for interpreting constitutional terms (connotation/denotation, moderate originalism, non-originalism) are examined to ascertain whether they could source such a law to the marriage power. It is submitted that none can do so without betraying their own core interpretative principle or the text and structure of the Constitution. However an alternative method for interpreting [*2] constitutional terms is proffered which may be able to establish a sufficient connection between a law that recognises same sex marriages and the marriage power. It involves recognising 'marriage' as a constitutionalised legal term of art whose meaning can be informed by developments since federation in common law and statute.

Case comment: Cubillo and Gunner V The Commonwealth: a denial of the stolen generation?

In the recent Australian decision in Cubillo and Gunner v The Commonwealth ( ‘Cubillo 3’ ), the Full Court of the Federal Court dismissed an appeal by the Aboriginal claimants seeking damages for, inter alia, their removal from their families and detention at certain Aboriginal institutions. The removal and detention of the plaintiffs was held to be lawful in the earlier determination of O’Loughlin J because it was, inter alia, believed to be in the [then] child’s best interests and, as the plaintiffs bore the onus of proof, they had failed to show that they were taken without the consent of their parents/guardians. This decision was based upon the factual finding that ‘at the relevant times, there was no general policy in force in the Northern Territory supporting the indiscriminate removal and detention of part-Aboriginal children, irrespective of the personal circumstances of each child’. The Full Court did not comment on O’Loughlin J’s assertion that the policy of removing part-Aboriginal children, as asserted by the plaintiffs, could not be maintained. Moreover, the Full Court in fact joined O’Loughlin J in trying to distance their findings from the broader issue of the legal rights of members of the Stolen Generation, emphasising that they were only concerned with the particular circumstances of the two plaintiffs/appellants. This case comment is not aimed at evaluating the specific legal issues raised by the plaintiffs’ claims in this case or reviewing the history of the Stolen Generation, but rather seeks to examine O’Loughlin J’s comment as to the absence of a policy of indiscriminate removal and detention of part-Aboriginal children in a bid to determine the parameters intended by the court. It will be seen that, at its broadest, the statement is quite inflammatory and may be seen as a denial of the Stolen Generation. It will be submitted that this was not intended by the court. At its narrowest, the statement is merely an assertion that the particular plaintiffs failed to prove their cases. It will be submitted that, whilst this clearly was the view of the court, O’Loughlin J’s statement does have broader implications which, it will be contended, are not warranted.

Removal of company directors in a climate of corporate collapses

The string of high-profile corporate collapses recently has provided a fresh insight into many important topics and issues in Australian corporations law. Notwithstanding this, one topic that continues to receive inadequate attention both in Australia and in foreign jurisdictions is the statutory removal of  directors. In an earlier article published in this journal, one of the present authors contributed towards addressing this lack of commentary on the topic by highlighting a number of peculiarities with the provisions under the then Corporations Law regulating the removal of directors in public and proprietary companies. Since that time, the CLERP amendments to the Corporations Law (now Corporations Act 2001) in 2000 introduced some interesting changes to the provisions dealing with the removal of directors in public and proprietary companies. In this article, the authors provide an explanation and critical analysis of these changes, and consider the recent Western Australian Supreme Court decision of Allied & Mining Process Ltd v Boldbow Pty Ltd [2002] WASC 195, which deals with some of the issues raised by the authors in relation to the CLERP amendments. According to the authors, whilst some of the peculiarities raised in the earlier article no longer exist post-CLERP, the current removal provisions still raise some important questions of interpretation.

Macleod and the offence of defrauding the company in one-person businesses: the divergence between legal principle and logic widens

The recent High Court decision in Macleod v R establishes that a director and sole shareholder may be convicted of fraudulently applying a company's property even though the person has consented to the personal use of the company's property. It is contended that while this decision is consistent with the weight of precedent, it is wrong in principle. The decision implies that corporations are not only separate legal entities, but that they are highly virtuous legal entities -- incapable of being imbued with the dishonest intentions and activities of the individuals controlling the company.

Why all directors should be shareholders in the company: the case against "independence"

It is argued that the shift towards more 'independent' directors, in the wake of corporate collapses, is a fundamentally bad move, undermining the rights and powers of minority shareholders - entrenches a second-rate corporate governance model, separation of ownership and control, in company law - rather than suggest cosmetic reform in an attempt to address the problem, it is proposed that all directors must have significant interest in the company they serve - directors' self-interests and the best interests of the company become intertwined - this is a more effective way of tackling the problem of separation of ownership and control

Corporate donations, the best interest of the company and the proper purpose doctrine

Corporate philanthropy is illegitimate spending by powerful corporate elite of someone else’s money; an attempt to bypass democratic allocation of taxes; philanthropy by individuals is laudable, but not by corporations.

Just as I wouldn’t want you to implement your personal judgments by writing checks on my bank account for charities of your choice, I feel it inappropriate to write checks on your corporate ‘bank account’ for the charities of my choice.

Commonwealth legislative power and "non punitive" detention: a constitutional roadmap

In 2004 The High Court handed down a number of decisions concerning detention imposed for purposes allegedly unrelated to punishment. This paper outlines the way the Federal Constitution restricts (and also facilitates) the imposition of "non punitive detention" by our governments. Such laws (as passed by the Federal Legislature) are constitutionally valid provided they can be characterised as falling within a legislative head of power under  section 51 off he Constitution. The power to detain for non punitive purposes can be reposed by the Legislature in the either the Executive or Judicial arms of government. Detention by the Executive is non punitive (and therefore does not offend the separation of powers) even though it involves a deprivation of liberty, provided it is imposed for “legitimate non punitive purposes”.  Legitimacy is in turn determined by reference to the section 51 heads of power. Detention for non punitive purposes by the judicial arm of government is constitutionally valid provided that (i) a “judicial process ” is adopted and (ii) (arguably) there is some link (albeit tenuous) with a previous finding of criminal guilt. The continuing existence of the “constitutional immunity ”from being detained by other than judicial order identified by the High Court in its 1992 decision in Lim v Minister for Immigration is called into question.

Comparing Australian commonwealth, state and territory budget balance numbers

This article presents the findings from a case study of the 2004–05 annual budgets prepared by the Commonwealth, state and territory governments of Australia. The study examined the headline budget balance (general government sector surplus or deficit) announced in the budget papers and speeches of each of the nine governments. Findings indicate the adoption of varying measurement bases and a consequent lack of comparability in the headlined budget balance numbers. Accounting reforms have resulted in adoption of two different systems of accrual accounting by governments — the Government Finance Statistics (GFS) system and the professional Australian Accounting Standards (AAS) system — which provide significantly different measurements of the budget balance. However, there has been no prescription of the manner in which these alternative measures should be presented. This raises a number of questions from an accounting perspective.