Termination fees in a ‘bright line’ jurisdiction

We seek to statistically inform the debate regarding the Australian Takeovers Panel’s ‘bright line’ policy towards break fees. Based on 313 takeovers from 2002 to 2006, 85 involving break fees, we find post-bid competition to be unrelated to break fee usage and inversely related to bid success. We also find that break fee usage has a detrimental effect on shareholder wealth as measured by both the final bid premium and abnormal returns. Therefore, although break fees appear to be neither anticompetitive nor coercive within the Australian context, they do appear to have had a deleterious effect on shareholder wealth.

Judicial and legislative considerations in the taxation of compensation receipts : an international comparison

In 1995, the Federal Commissioner of Taxation released Taxation Ruling TR 95/35 in an attempt to comprehensively address the appropriate capital gains tax treatment of a receipt of compensation, awarded either by the courts or via a settlement. The ruling was in response to the numerous, somewhat contradictory, court decisions of the early 1990s. Despite the release of TR 95/35, there still appears to be a lack of consensus as to the appropriate treatment of such awards. It has been suggested that the only way a taxpayer can, with any certainty, determine their liability is to obtain a private binding ruling, a far from satisfactory situation. In an attempt to clarify what the capital gains tax consequences of a compensation receipt should be, this article examines the Australian position and explores the comparative jurisprudence of the United Kingdom and Canada to ascertain whether the Australian attitude is consistent with these international jurisdictions. This article concludes that while the jurisdictions, through differing approaches, achieve a similar result, there is still a need to address the uncertainties that remain.

District Court of Queensland Act 1968 s 68 : jurisdiction in pre-proceedings applications under Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002

In Woolworths Ltd v Graham [2007] QDC 301 Searles DCJ struck out a pre-proceedings application under the Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld)on the basis that the material before the Court was not sufficient to attract the jurisdiction of the District Court.The decision serves more broadly as a reminder that the District Court is an inferior court of defined and limited jurisdiction and that any proceedings brought in it must be demonstrably within the jurisdiction conferred on that court by legislation.

Judicial intervention in the affairs of unincorporated religious associations in New South Wales

The leading Australian High Court case of Cameron v Hogan (1934) 51 CLR 358 confirmed that associations which are 'social, sporting, political, scientific, religious, artistic or humanitarian in character’, and not formed ‘for private gain or material advantage’, are usually formed on a basis of mutual consent. Unless there is some clear, positive indication that the members wish to relate to each other in a legal fashion, the rules of the association will not be treated as an enforceable contract in contrast to the rules of incorporated bodies. Australian unincorporated associations experiencing internal disputes, like those in most other common law jurisdictions, have found courts reluctant to provide a remedy unless there is a proprietary interest or trust to protect. This is further compounded by the judicial view that an unincorporated association has no legal recognition as a ‘juristic person’. The right to hold property and the ability to sue and be sued are incidences of this recognition. By contrast, the law recognises ‘artificial’ legal persons such as corporations, who are given rights to hold property and to sue and be sued. However, when a number of individuals associate together for a non-commercial, lawful purpose, but not by way of a corporate structure, legal recognition ‘as a group’ is denied. Since 1934, a significant number of cases have distinguished or otherwise declined to follow this precedent of the High Court. A trenchant criticism is found in McKinnon v Grogan [1974] 1 NSWLR 295, 298 where Wootten J said that ‘citizens are entitled to look to the courts for the same assistance in resolving disputes about the conduct of sporting, political and social organisations as they can expect in relation to commercial institutions’. According to Wootten J at 298, if disputes are not settled by the courts, this would create a ‘legal-no-man's land, in which disputes are settled not in accordance with justice and the fulfilment of deliberately undertaken obligations, but by deceit, craftiness, and an arrogant disregard of rights’. Cameron v Hogan was decided in 1934. There is an increasing volume of first instance cases which distinguish or, in the words of Palmer J, ‘just pay lip service’ to this High Court decision. (Coleman v Liberal Party of Australia (2007) 212 FLR 271, 278). The dissenting cases seem to call for a judicial policy initiative. This would require recognition by judges that voluntary associations play a significant role in society and that members have a legitimate, enforceable expectation that the rules of the association will be observed by members and in the last resort, enforced by the courts without the need to prove contractual intention, the existence of a trust or the existence of a right of a proprietary nature. This thesis asks: what legal, as distinct from political, redress does an ordinary member have, when a rule is made or a process followed which is contrary to the underlying doctrines and philosophies embodied in the constitutional documents of an unincorporated religious association? When, if at all, will a court intervene to ensure doctrinal purity or to supervise the daily life of a large unincorporated religious association? My research objective is to examine and analyse leading cases and relevant legislation on the enforceability of the constitutions of large, unincorporated, religious associations with particular reference to the Anglican Church in New South Wales. Given its numerical size, wide geographical spread and presence since the foundation of New South Wales, the Anglican Church in New South Wales, contains a sufficient variety of ‘real life’ situations to be representative of the legal issues posed by Cameron v Hogan which may be faced by other large, unincorporated, religious associations in New South Wales. In contemporary society, large, unincorporated, religious associations play an important community role. The resolution of internal disputes in such associations should not remain captive to legal doctrines of an earlier age.

Prosecution of maritime terrorists : the role of national courts in ensuring accountability

Maritime security has emerged as a critical legal and political issue in the contemporary world. Terrorism in the maritime domain is a major maritime security issue. Ten out of the 44 major terrorist groups of the world, as identified in the US Department of State’s Country Reports on Terrorism, have maritime terrorism capabilities. Prosecution of maritime terrorists is a politically and legally difficult issue, which may create conflicts of jurisdiction. Prosecution of alleged maritime terrorists is carried out by national courts. There is no international judicial institution for the prosecution of maritime terrorists. International law has therefore anticipated a vital role for national courts in this respect. The international legal framework for combating maritime terrorism has been elaborately examined in existing literature therefore this paper will only highlight the issues regarding the prosecution of maritime terrorists. This paper argues that despite having comprehensive intentional legal framework for the prosecution of maritime terrorists there is still some scopes for conflicts of jurisdiction particularly where two or more States are interested to prosecute the same offender. This existing legal problem has been further aggravated in the post September 11 era. Due to the political and security implications, States may show reluctance in ensuring the international law safeguards of alleged perpetrators in the arrest, detention and prosecution process. Nevertheless, international law has established a comprehensive system for the prosecution of maritime terrorists where national courts is the main forum of ensuring the international law safeguards of alleged perpetrators as well as ensuring the effective prosecution of maritime terrorists thereby playing an instrumental role in establishing a rule based system for combating maritime terrorism. Using two case studies, this paper shows that the role of national courts has become more important in the present era because there may be some situations where no State is interested to initiate proceedings in international forums for vindicating rights of an alleged offender even if there is a clear evidence of violation of international human rights law in the arrest, detention and prosecution process. This paper presents that despite some bottlenecks national courts are actively playing this critical role. Overall, this paper highlights the instrumental role of national courts in the international legal order.

Mainstreaming therapeutic jurisprudence and the adversarial paradigm—incommensurability and the possibility of a shared disciplinary matrix

Problem-solving courts appear to achieve outcomes that are not common in mainstream courts. There are increasing calls for the adoption of more therapeutic and problem-solving practices by mainstream judges in civil and criminal courts in a number of jurisdictions, most notably in the United States and Australia. Currently, a judge who sets out to exercise a significant therapeutic function is likely to be doing so in a specialist court or jurisdiction, outside the mainstream court system, and arguably, outside the adversarial paradigm itself. To some extent, this work is tolerated but marginalised. However, do therapeutic and problem-solving functions have the potential to help define, rather than simply complement, the role of judicial officers? The core question addressed in this thesis is whether the judicial role could evolve to be not just less adversarial, but fundamentally non-adversarial. In other words, could we see—or are we seeing—a juristic paradigm shift not just in the colloquial, casual sense of the word, but in the strong, worldview changing sense meant by Thomas Kuhn? This thesis examines the current relationship between adversarialism and therapeutic jurisprudence in the context of Kuhn’s conception of the transition from periods of ‘normal science’, through periods of anomaly and disciplinary crises to paradigm shifts. It considers whether therapeutic jurisprudence and adversarialism are incommensurable in the Kuhnian sense, and if so, what this means for the relationship between the two, and for the agenda to mainstream therapeutic jurisprudence. The thesis asserts that Kuhnian incommensurability is, in fact, a characteristic of the relationship between adversarialism and therapeutic jurisprudence, but that the possibility of a therapeutic paradigm shift in law can be reconciled with many adversarial and due process principles by relating this incommensurability to a broader disciplinary matrix.

The Royal Commission into the NSW Police Service : process corruption and the limits of judicial reflexivity

This paper will offer an examination of the Reports of the Royal Commission into the NSW Police Service (Interim Report February 1996; Interim Report: Immediate Measures November 1996; Final Report Vol I: Corruption; Final Report Vol II: Reform; Final Report Vol III: Appendices May 1997) excluding the Report on Paedophilia, August 1997. The examination will be confined essentially to one question: to what extent do the published Reports consider the part played by the judiciary, prosecutors and lawyers, in the construction of a form of criminal justice revealed by the Commission itself, to be disfigured by serious process corruption? The examination will be conducted by way of a chronological trawl through the Reports of the Commission in an attempt to identify all references to the role of the judiciary, prosecutors and lawyers. The adequacy of any such treatment will then be considered. In order to set the scene a brief and generalised overview of the Wood Commission will be offered together with the Commission's definition of process corruption.

“Best interests” and withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment from an adult who lacks capacity in the parens patriae jurisdiction

Disputes about withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment are increasingly coming before Australian Supreme Courts. Such cases are generally heard in the parens patriae jurisdiction where the test applied is what is in the patient’s “best interests”. However, the application of the “best interests” test, and its meaning, remains unclear in this context. To shed light on this emerging body of jurisprudence, this article analyses the Australian superior court decisions that consider an adult’s best interests in the context of decisions about life-sustaining treatment. We identify a number of themes from the current body of cases and consider how these themes may guide future decision-making. After then considering the law in the United Kingdom, we suggest an approach for assessing best interests that could be adopted by Australian Supreme Courts. We argue that the suggested approach will lead to a more structured and systematic decision-making process that better promotes the best interests of the patient.

‘Structuring’ judicial sentencing discretion : consistency, guidance or pandering to the punitive?

Until quite recently, most Australian jurisdictions gave statutory force to the principle of imprisonment as a sanction of last resort, reflecting its status as the most punitive sentencing option open to the court.1 That principle gave primary discretion as to whether incarceration was the most appropriate means of achieving the purpose of a sentence to the sentencing court, which received all of the information relevant to the offence, the offender and any victim(s). The disestablishment of this principle is symptomatic of an increasing erosion of judicial discretion with respect to sentencing, which appears to be resulting in some extremely punitive consequences.

Prosecution of maritime pirates : the national court is dead—long live the national court

Piracy is one of the main maritime security concerns in the contemporary world. The number of piracy incidents is increasing rapidly, which is highly problematic for maritime security. Although international law provides universal jurisdiction for the prosecution of maritime pirates, the actual number of prosecutions is alarmingly low compared to the number of incidents of piracy. Despite many states becoming parties to the relevant international conventions, they are reluctant to establish the necessary legal and institutional frameworks at the national level for the prosecution of pirates. The growing incidences of piracy and the consequential problems associated with prosecuting pirates have created doubts about the adequacy of the current international legal system, which is fully dependent on national courts for the prosecution of pirates. This article examines the possible ways for ensuring the effective prosecution of pirates. Contrary to the different proposals forwarded by researchers in the wake of Somali piracy for the establishment of international judicial institutions for the prosecution of pirates, this article argues that the operationalization of national courts through the proper implementation of relevant international legal instruments within domestic legal systems is the most viable solution. However, this article submits that the operationalization of national courts will not be very successful following the altruistic model of universal adjudicative jurisdiction. A state may enact legislation implementing universal jurisdiction but will not be very interested in prosecuting a pirate in its national court if it has no relation with the piratical incident. Rather, it will be successful if the global community seriously implement the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (SUA Convention), which obligates the states that have some connection with a piratical incident to prosecute pirates in their national courts.

Re-examining habitual residence as the sole connecting factor in Hague Convention child abduction cases

This article critiques the usefulness of habitual residence as the sole connecting factor in Hague Convention child abduction cases. This is achieved by examining the quality of this jurisdiction in light of changes in the gender dynamics underpinning international parental child abduction and the transnational family phenomenon. Arguably, the child’s habitual residence as a home environment of the nature anticipated by the Convention’s drafters is an increasingly outdated construct. This is due to an increase in both the number of abducting primary-carer mothers, and their families’ growing mobility. Judicial determinations of habitual residence made during Conven- tion return proceedings are entrenched in the state-centric paradigm. This paradigm is becoming increasingly incompatible with the lives of families which experience international parental child abduction.

A narrative analysis of judicial attitudes towards sexual harassment in Japan

This study applies a narrative analysis of the first two judicial decisions on sexual harassment in Japan to test claims of a culture of gender bias in Japanese judicial attitudes towards victims of sexual violence. Although the results do not provide an unambiguous support or rebuttal of gendered justice in Japan, they do reveal some of the dangers of narrative analysis as a basis for making generalizable claims about how law functions in Japanese society.

En förutbestämd sanning : Barnamord och delaktighet i 1700-talets Finland belysta genom kön, kropp och social kontroll

The study analyses the prevention or endorsing of the crime of infanticide in Finland 1702 1807, rather than the result. Also the impacts of the female body, biology of childbirth and experiences of pregnancy are examined, together with insights from modern medical research. Circumstances are reconstructed by a critical reading of judicial records on all levels of the judicial system. In all 269 cases of infanticide and 142 accessory crimes within the jurisdiction of the Turku court of appeal are studied, with particular focus on exceptionally well recorded cases of 83 accused women and 41 women and men accused of being party to the crime. Secondary sources are medical and jurisprudential writings, the public debate on infanticide, broadsheets and letters asking the King for pardon. Infanticide was considered murder by law. Unmarried women were predetermined as the main culprits. Nevertheless, deliberate infanticides were rare and committed mostly in accomplice. The majority of the infanticides studied were cases where inexperienced and unmarried women accidentally had given birth alone and usually to a dead child. Unaware that the pain they were experiencing was in fact a labour, the accused women instinctively sought solitude to push out the child. Some misunderstood the birth as an urgent need to defecate. The unexpected delivery ended in hiding the baby without remorse. This crime was promoted by several factors in Finnish rural culture, amongst others that also married women hid their pregnancy. The immediate household members did not necessarily know about the childbirth and failed to help the woman. This typical pattern in most cases of infanticide in 18th century Finland is also recorded in modern cases of unknown pregnancies. Fear of accountability prevented witnesses testifying to the actual course of events. The truth remained elusive. With only a few exceptions, the women were sentenced to death or imprisonment. The majority of those accused of accomplice were acquitted. However, too harsh sentences for accidents affected the reporting of the crime. Criminal politics failed to curtail infanticide as the crime was unsatisfactorily addressed by law, society and the judicial system.

Recognition and enforcement in cross-border insolvency law: A proposal for judicial gap-filling

This Article analyzes the recognition and enforcement of cross-border insolvency judgments from the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia to determine whether the UNCITRAL Model Law’s goal of modified universalism is currently being practiced, and subjects the Model Law to analysis through the lens of international relations theories to elaborate a way forward. We posit that courts could use the express language of the Model Law text to confer recognition and enforcement of foreign insolvency judgments. The adoption of our proposal will reduce costs, maximize recovery for creditors, and ensure predictability for all parties.