Mandatory offers under the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 - with interest please!

In Windon v Edwards [2005] QDC 029 Robin QC DCJ considered the cost consequence of mandatory final offers under the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 (Qld)

Applying and testing design for intuitive interaction

Various tools have been developed to assist designers in making interfaces easier to use although none yet offer a complete solution. Through previous work we have established that intuitive interaction is based on past experience. From this we have developed theory around intuitive interaction, a continuum and a conceptual tool for intuitive use. We then trialled our tool. Firstly, one designer used the tool to design a camera. Secondly, seven groups of postgraduate students re-designed various products using our tool. We then chose one of these - a microwave – and prototyped the new and original microwave interfaces on a touchscreen. We tested them on three different age groups. We found that the new design was more intuitive and rated by participants as more familiar. Therefore, design interventions based on our intuitive interaction theory can work. Work is ongoing to develop the tool further.

Practice and Procedures - Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 ss 39 and 57

In Bermingham v Priest [2002] QSC 057 jones J considered the position of persons seeking to claim damages where the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 applies prior to its amendment by the Motor Accident Insurance Amendment Act 2000, and where proceedings are brought close to expiration of the statutory limitation period.

Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 - obligation to disclose

In Turpin v Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd (unreported, Supreme Court of Queensland, S5216 of 2001), Mullins J, 17.10.2001) the plaintiff applied for a declaration that the respondent disclose pursuant to s47 of the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 copies of three statements referred to in a loss assessor's investigation report as "attached". The issue involved determination of whether the statements must be disclosed under s48(2) even though protected by legal professional privilege. The Court applied the decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal in James v Workcover Queensland.

Personal injury in motor accident in NSW - procedural requirements under Motor Accidents Insurance Act 1988 (NSW)

In Hooper v Robinson [2002] QDC 080 (District Court of Queensland, D 4841 of 2001, McGill DCJ, 19.4.2002) McGill DCJ considered the application of the decision in John Pfeiffer Pty Ltd v Rogerson [2000] 203 CLR 503 to notice requirements such as in s42 of NSW Motor Accident Insurance Act 1988 and concluded such provisions are now substantive.

Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 - whether vehicle in question a vehicle "for which registration is required"

In Gideona v Nominal Defendant [2005] QCA 261, the Queensland Court of Appeal reconsidered the question of what is the material time for determining whether registration of a motor vehicle is required. The Court declined to follow the decision in Kelly v Alford [1988] 1 Qd R 404; deciding that the material time was the time when the accident occurred.

Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 s45 - whether obligation to co-operate may authorise order requiring commencement of proceedings by minor prior to expiration of limitation period

In Australian Associated Motor Insurers Ltd v McPaul; Council of the City of Gold Coast v McPaul [2005] QSC 278 the applicant insurer sought an order requiring a claimant who had been injured in a motor vehicle accident some years earlier when he was five years old to commence a proceeding to determine the question of the applicant's liability to him. The applicant's interest in seeking the order was to avoid the prejudice which could follow from further delay, particularly delay until the respondent became obliged to commence proceedings to avoid a limitations bar.

Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 - reasonable excuse for delay in giving notice under s37

The decisions in Perdis v The Nominal Defendant [2003] QCA 555, Miller v the Nominal Defendant [2003] QCA 558 and Piper v the Nominal Defendant [2003] QCA 557 were handed down contemporaneously by the Queensland Court of Appeal on December 15 2003. They consider important issues as to the construction of key provisions of the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 (Qld)

Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 - compulsory conferences and offers to settle

In Lindsay v Aumaali [2004] QDC 028 the Court considered whether it could, in effect, postpone the requirement for a compulsory conference under s51A of the Moror Accident insurance Act 1994 (Qld) or the exchange of final offers under s51C of the Act until after the start of proceedings.

Orientation dependence of spatial memory acquired from auditory experience

The present study investigated whether memory for a room-sized spatial layout learned through auditory localization of sounds exhibits orientation dependence similar to that observed for spatial memory acquired from stationary viewing of the environment. Participants learned spatial layouts by viewing objects or localizing sounds and then performed judgments of relative direction among remembered locations. The results showed that direction judgments following auditory learning were performed most accurately at a particular orientation in the same way as were those following visual learning, indicating that auditorily encoded spatial memory is orientation dependent. In combination with previous findings that spatial memories derived from haptic and proprioceptive experiences are also orientation dependent, the present finding suggests that orientation dependence is a general functional property of human spatial memory independent of learning modality.

Disclosure of documents and limitation of actions

This article considers the decisions in Stephan v NRMA Insurance Limited [2001]QDC 002 and Bertha v Dragut [2001] QDC 003

MiniOrb : a sensor interaction platform for indoor climate preferences [Extended Abstract]

We introduce the MiniOrb platform, a combined sensor and interaction platform built to understand and encourage the gathering of data around personal indoor climate preferences in office environments. The platform consists of a sensor device, gathering localised environmental data and an attached tangible interaction and ambient display device. This device allows users to understand their local environment and record preferences with regards to their preferred level of office comfort. In addition to the tangible device we built a web-based mobile application that allowed users to record comfort preferences through a different interface. This paper describes the design goals and technical setup of the MiniOrb platform.

Evaluating the use of ambient and tangible interaction approaches for personal indoor climate preferences [Extended Abstract]

In this paper we describe the preliminary results of a field study which evaluated the use of MiniOrb, a system that employs ambient and tangible interaction mechanisms to allow inhabitants of office environments to report on subjectively perceived office comfort levels. The purpose of this study was to explore the role of ubiquitous computing in the individual control of indoor climate and specifically answer the question to what extent ambient and tangible interaction mechanisms are suited for the task of capturing individual comfort preferences in a non-obtrusive manner. We outline the preliminary results of an in-situ trial of the system.

Brca2 is involved in meiosis in Arabidopsis thaliana as suggested by its interaction with Dmc1

Two BRCA2-like sequences are present in the Arabidopsis genome. Both genes are expressed in flower buds and encode nearly identical proteins, which contain four BRC motifs. In a yeast two-hybrid assay, the Arabidopsis Brca2 proteins interact with Rad51 and Dmc1. RNAi constructs aimed at silencing the BRCA2 genes at meiosis triggered a reproducible sterility phenotype, which was associated with dramatic meiosis alterations. We obtained the same phenotype upon introduction of RNAi constructs aimed at silencing the RAD51 gene at meiosis in dmc1 mutant plants. The meiotic figures we observed strongly suggest that homologous recombination is highly disturbed in these meiotic cells, leaving aberrant recombination events to repair the meiotic double-strand breaks. The 'brca2' meiotic phenotype was eliminated in spo11 mutant plants. Our experiments point to an essential role of Brca2 at meiosis in Arabidopsis. We also propose a role for Rad51 in the dmc1 context.

Interaction between Arabidopsis Brca2 and its partners Rad51, Dmc1, and Dss1

The Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) orthologs of Brca2, a protein whose mutations are involved in breast cancer in humans, were previously shown to be essential at meiosis. In an attempt to better understand the Brca2-interacting properties, we examined four partners of the two isoforms of Brca2 identified in Arabidopsis (AtRad51, AtDmc1, and two AtDss1 isoforms). The two Brca2 and the two Dss1 isoforms are named AtBrca2(IV), AtBrca2(V), AtDss1(I), and AtDss1(V) after their chromosomal localization. We first show that both AtBrca2 proteins can interact with either AtRad51 or AtDmc1 in vitro, and that the N-terminal region of AtBrca2 is responsible for these interactions. More specifically, the BRC motifs (so called because iterated in the Brca2 protein) in Brca2 are involved in these interactions: BRC motif number 2 (BRC2) alone can interact with AtDmc1, whereas BRC motif number 4 (BRC4) recognizes AtRad51. The human Rad51 and Dmc1 proteins themselves can interact with either the complete (HsRad51) or a shorter version of AtBrca2 (HsRad51 or HsDmc1) that comprises all four BRC motifs. We also identified two Arabidopsis isoforms of Dss1, another known partner of Brca2 in other organisms. Although all four Brca2 and Dss1 proteins are much conserved, AtBrca2(IV) interacts with only one of these AtDss1 proteins, whereas AtBrca2(V) interacts with both of them. Finally, we show for the first time that an AtBrca2 protein could bind two different partners at the same time: AtRad51 and AtDss1(I), or AtDmc1 and AtDss1(I).