The law of insider trading in Australia

This book provides a detailed and practical analysis of Australian insider trading laws. The work: examines all fundamental concepts relating to insider trading such as 'who is an insider', 'what is inside information' and 'when is information generally available', together with commentaries on proposed changes to the laws and an examination of the impact of the most recent decisions, including Hannes, and Rivkin; provides a very detailed examination of the defences and exceptions, with particular attention to the operation of Chinese Walls; analyses fully and systematically the provisions on insider trading in the Corporations Act and the Criminal Code (Cth) within the context of decided cases and relevant secondary materials; covers comprehensively the penalties and remedies for contravention of the insider trading regime (including the intricate civil compensation provisions, and an up-to-date analysis of the civil penalties regime in light of ASIC v Petsas); and discusses the operation and effectiveness of continuous disclosure as a means of preventing insider trading.

Moral rights: a brief excursion into Canadian history

In 1931, Canada was the first of the copyright countries to adopt a moral rights provision, closely modeled on Article 6bis of the Berne Convention, into its legislation. But this was not the first step that Canada had taken towards the legislative protection of moral rights. Not only had certain provisions protective of the non-economic interests of authors been included in the federal Criminal Code and in the legislation of Quebec prior to 1920, but during the 1920s a sustained effort had been made to give these interests more explicit and systematic protection under the Copyright Act. The present article focuses on a series of bills put to the Canadian Parliament from 1924 onwards. Not only would they have provided increased protection for the non-economic interests of authors but they would have given a legislative definition to the term "moral right". These bills, framed in the absence of any influence from Article 6bis, provide a glimpse of what "moral rights" might have been. They support the view that Canada was moving towards the express legislative protection of these rights significantly earlier that is commonly thought.

Prosecuting corporations and officers for industrial manslaughter-recent Australian developments

There have been concerns for some time about whether breaches of duty that cause a worker's death are appropriately dealt with under occupational health and safety legislation, or whether criminal prosecution is warranted in those cases involving recklessness or gross negligence. Defaulting employers are rarely prosecuted under existing criminal laws and there are serious doctrinal barriers to finding a corporation guilty of mens rea offences.
The Australian Capital Territory leads the way in Australia with the recent introduction of new criminal offences of industrial manslaughter for corporations and their senior officers. These laws rely on concepts of corporate liability based on organisational responsibility and corporate culture in the model Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) , thus avoiding the limitations of the identification doctrine. Other active Australian jurisdictions, whilst initially open to the notion of industrial manslaughter laws, have preferred to make changes to existing OHS laws to deal with the problem of workplace fatalities.
Whilst it has its limitations, and applies only in Australia's smallest jurisdiction, the Australian Capital Territory legislation reflects a commitment to treating workplace deaths with the seriousness they deserve, and making it easier to prosecute corporations whose operations are conducted recklessly or with gross negligence.

Preventative detention in Australian law : issues of interpretation

This article examines the statutory interpretation of terms in Div 105 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) . This division is the regime for preventative detention orders (PDOs), an Executive order permitting a person to be taken into custody and deprived of his/her personal liberty for the purpose of either preventing an imminent terrorist act or preserving evidence of a past terrorist act. The organisation of this article corresponds with three key features of a PDO from this description: "detention"; "Executive"; and "preventative purpose". To consider the interpretation of Div 105 , this article relies on statutory principles of interpretation, and most notably, the recent authority of Thomas v Mowbray (2007) 81 ALJR 1414 [PDF] ; [2007] HCA 33.