Conclaves and concurrent expert evidence: A positive development in Australian legal practice?

Many Australian courts now prefer pre-hearing meetings of experts (conclaves) being convened to prepare joint reports to identify areas of agreement and disagreement, followed by concurrent expert evidence at trial. This contrasts to the traditional approach where experts did not meet before trial and did not give evidence together. Most judges, lawyers and expert witnesses favour this as a positive development in Australian legal practice, at least for civil disputes. This new approach impacts medical practitioners who are called upon to give expert evidence, or who are parties to disputes before the courts. Arguably, it is too soon to tell whether the relative lack of transparency at the conclave stage will give rise to difficulties in the coronial, disciplinary and criminal arenas.

Policing expert testimony in a death investigation: Medical opinion as legal fact

Within coronial investigations, pathologists are called upon to given evidence as to cause of death. This evidence is given great weight by the coroners; after all, scientific ‘truth’ is widely deemed to be far more reliable than legal ‘opinion’. The purpose of this paper is to examine the ontological and epistemological status of that evidence, from the perspectives of both the pathologists and the coroners. As part of an Australian Research Council Linkage Grant, interviews were conducted with seven pathologists and 10 coroners from within the Queensland coronial system. Contrary to expectations, and the work of philosophers of science, such as Feyerabend (1975), pathologists did not present their findings in terms of unequivocal facts or objective truths relating to causes of death. Rather, their evidence was largely presented as ‘educated opinion’ based upon ‘the weight of evidence’. It was actually the coroners who translated that opinion into ‘medical fact’ within the proceedings of their death investigations, arguably as a consequence of the administrative necessity to reach a clear-cut finding as to cause of death, and on the basis of their own understanding of the ontology of medical knowledge. These findings support Latour’s (2010) claim that law requires a fundamentally different epistemology to science, and that science is not entirely to blame for the extravagant truth-claims made on its behalf

Socio-Legal Aspects of the 3D Printing Revolution

Additive manufacturing or ‘3D printing’ has emerged into the mainstream in the last few years, with much hype about its revolutionary potential as the latest ‘disruptive technology’ to destroy existing business models, empower individuals and evade any kind of government control. This book examines the trajectory of 3D printing in practice and how it interacts with various areas of law, including intellectual property, product liability, gun laws, data privacy and fundamental/constitutional rights. A particular comparison is made between 3D printing and the Internet as this has been, legally-speaking, another ‘disruptive technology’ and also one on which 3D printing is partially dependent. This book is the first expert analysis of 3D printing from a legal perspective and provides a critical assessment of the extent to which existing legal regimes can be successfully applied to, and enforced vis-à-vis, 3D printing.

Child abuse and neglect: A socio-legal study of mandatory reporting in Australia - Report for the Australian Government

This report presents the results of a national study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect. Government administrative data over a decade (2003-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses depending on the jurisdiction, and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours, depending on the jurisdiction), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the ACT Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in the Australian Capital Territory. Government administrative data over a decade (2003-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses depending on the jurisdiction, and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours, depending on the jurisdiction), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the New South Wales Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in New South Wales. Government administrative data were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses, and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the Northern Territory Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in the Northern Territory. Government administrative data over a decade (2003-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses, vs family members, neighbours), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the Queensland Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in Queensland. Government administrative data over a decade (2003-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., teachers, doctors, nurses, and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the South Australian Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in South Australia. Government administrative data over a decade (2003-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses; and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the Tasmanian Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in Tasmania. Government administrative data over a nine year period (2004-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses; and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the Victorian Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in Victoria. Government administrative data over a decade (2003-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses; and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the West Australian Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in Western Australia. Government administrative data over a decade (2003-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses, family members, neighbours), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

The Australian Nonprofit Sector Legal Almanac 2015

Collected summaries of court cases involving nonprofit organisations, from Australia and overseas, during 2015, along with updates of legislative changes in all Australian jurisdictions. Significant Australian cases included several disputes with State Revenue Authorities about exemption from payroll taxes.

Res Communis? A critical legal geography of outer space, Antarctica, and the deep seabed

This chapter provides a critical legal geography of outer Space, charting the topography of the debates and struggles around its definition, management, and possession. As the emerging field of critical legal geography demonstrates, law is not a neutral organiser of space, but is instead a powerful cultural technology of spatial production. Drawing on legal documents such as the Outer Space Treaty and the Moon Treaty, as well as on the analogous and precedent-setting legal geographies of Antarctica and the deep seabed, the chapter addresses key questions about the legal geography of outer Space, questions which are of growing importance as Space’s available satellite spaces in the geostationary orbit diminish, Space weapons and mining become increasingly viable, Space colonisation and tourism emerge, and questions about Space’s legal status grow in intensity. Who owns outer Space? Who, and whose rules, govern what may or may not (literally) take place there? Is the geostationary orbit the sovereign property of the equatorial states it supertends, as these states argued in the 1970s? Or is it a part of the res communis, or common property of humanity, which currently legally characterises outer Space? Does Space belong to no one, or to everyone? As challenges to the existing legal spatiality of outer Space emerge from spacefaring states, companies, and non-spacefaring states, it is particularly critical that the current spatiality of Space is understood and considered.