Federal Court Rules O23 r 11 - offers of compromise - offer for dismissal of claim and to forego recovery of costs.

In Uniline Australia Ltd ACN 010752057 v S Briggs Pty Ltd ACN 007415518 (No 2) [2009] FCA 920 Greenwood J considered a number of principles guiding the exercise of discretion in relation to costs, particularly when offers of compromise have been made under the formal process provided by the Federal Court Rules.

Green crime and the role of environmental courts

Environmental issues continue to capture international headlines and remain the subject of intense intellectual, political and public debate. As a result, environmental law is widely recognised as the fastest growing area of international jurisprudence. This, combined with the rapid expansion of environmental agreements and policies, has created a burgeoning landscape of administrative, regulatory and judicial regimes. Emerging from these developments are increases in environmental offences, and more recently environmental crimes. The judicial processing of environmental or ‘green’ crimes is rapidly developing across many jurisdictions. Since 1979, Australia has played a lead role in criminal justice processing of environment offences through the New South Wales Land and Environment Court (NSW LEC). This article draws on case data, observations and interviews with court personnel, to examine the ways in which environmental justice is now administered through the existing court structures, and how it has changed since the Court���s inception.

Howzat! The High Court, negligence and indoor cricket

This article examines the High Court case of Woods v Multi-Sport that considers the liability of an indoor cricket centre for an injury sustained by a player. It is a good example of how the issue of breach is dealt with in a sports law context and also shows how difficult it can be to determine when a sporting body will in breach of a duty of care owed to its participants.

Court overrides costs assessment limits

This article considers the implications for Queensland practitioners of the decision of the New South Wales Court of Appeal in Branson v Tucker [2012] NSWCA 310. That decision involved the question whether the court retained a jurisdiction to examine the reasonableness of costs charged by a barrister, who had entered a costs agreement with solicitors, in circumstances where where had been no application under the Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW) for an assessment of the costs the subject of the bill and it was no longer possible for such an application to be made.

In defence of Victoria's Children's Court : its value and role in the child protection system

Australian child protection systems have been subject to sustained and significant criticism for many decades. As a central part of that system Children’s Courts have been implicated: three recent inquiries into the child protection system in Victoria all criticised the Family Division of the Children’s Court.1 In the resulting debate two diametrically opposed points of view surfaced about the Children’s Court and the role that legal procedures and professionals should play in child protection matters. On one side bodies like the Children’s Court of Victoria, Victoria Legal Aid (‘VLA’), the Law Institute of Victoria (‘LIV’), and the Federation of Community Legal Centres (‘FCLC’) argued that the Children’s Court plays a vital role in child protection and should continue to play that role.2 On the other side a coalition of human service and child protection agencies called for major change including the removal of the Children’s Court from the child protection system. Victoria’s Department of Human Services (‘DHS’) has been critical of the Court3 as have community sector organisations like Anglicare, Berry Street, MacKillop Family Services and the Salvation Army — all agencies the DHS funds to deliver child protection services.4 Victoria’s Child Safety Commissioner has also called for major reform, publicly labelling the Court a ‘lawyers’ playground’ and recommending abolishing the Court���s involvement in child protection completely.

The Role of the Judiciary in Earth Jurisprudence : An Analysis of Judicial Approaches to Standing in Climate Change and Environmental Justice Litigation

The role of the judiciary in common law systems is to create law, interpret law and uphold the law. As such decisions by courts on matters related to ecologically sustainable development, natural resource use and management and climate change make an important contribution to earth jurisprudence. There are examples where judicial decisions further the goals of earth jurisprudence and examples where decisions go against the principles of earth jurisprudence. This presentation will explore judicial approaches to standing in Australia and America. The paper will explore two trends in each jurisdiction. Approaches by American courts to standing will be examined in reference to climate change and environmental justice litigation. While Australian approaches to standing will be examined in the context of public interest litigation and environmental criminal negligence cases. The presentation will draw some conclusions about the role of standing in each of these cases and implications of this for earth jurisprudence.

Compensation covenants for mining activities run with the land : a win for successive landowners

The Queensland Supreme Court case of Cape Flattery Silica Mines Pty Ltd v Hope Vale Aboriginal Shire Council [2012] QSC 381 provides guidance on the long-term ramifications of compensation agreements for mining activities. The central issue considered by the Court was whether compensation payments relate to land and run with the land pursuant to s 53(1) of the Property Law Act.

Civil procedure : commentary and materials (3rd ed.)

This book provides a comprehensive analysis of the practical and theoretical issues encountered in Australian civil procedure, including alternative dispute resolution. Each chapter features in-depth questions and notes together with lists of further reading to aid understanding of the issue. It also examines and discusses each substantive and procedural step in the trial process. Topics include jurisdiction of a court to consider a matter, alternative dispute resolution. limitations of actions, commencing proceedings, pleading, gathering evidence, trial and appeal, costs and practice directions. The procedures in the Supreme Courts of each of the states and Territories are covered, as well as those of the Federal Court of Australia.

Legal Profession Act 2007 : entitlement to itemised bill – meaning of “client” – meaning of “third party payer”

In Legal Services Commissioner and Wright [2010] QSC 168 and Amos v Ian K Fry & Company, the Supreme Court of Queensland considered the scope of some of the provisions of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld), including the definition of “third party payer” in s 301 of the Act.

Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW) : costs agreement between law practice and client - whether binding on non-associated third party payer

The decision in the New South Wales Supreme Court in Boyce v McIntyre [2008] NSWSC 1218 involved determination of a number of issues relating to an assessment of costs under the Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW). The issue of broad significance was whether a non-associated third party payer must pay the fixed fee that was agreed between the law practice and the client. The court found that the client agreement did not form the basis of assessing costs for the non-associated third party payer.

Disclosure obligations on ex parte application for freezing order - duty of practitioners to the court - failure to comply with duty - serious dereliction of duty to court - supplemental order for costs against solicitors personally

The decision of Applegarth J in Heartwood Architectural & Joinery Pty Ltd v Redchip Lawyers [2009] QSC 195 (27 July 2009) involved a costs order against solicitors personally. This decision is but one of several recent decisions in which the court has been persuaded that the circumstances justified costs orders against legal practitioners on the indemnity basis. These decisions serve as a reminder to practitioners of their disclosure obligations when seeking any interlocutory relief in an ex parte application. These obligations are now clearly set out in r 14.4 of the Legal Profession (Solicitors) Rule 2007 and r 25 of 2007 Barristers Rule. Inexperience or ignorance will not excuse breaches of the duties owed to the court.

Court-provided trial presentation technology : the way of the future?

The trial in Covecorp Constructions Pty Ltd v Indigo Projects Pty Ltd (File no BS 10157 of 2001; BS 2763 of 2002) commenced on 8 October 2007 before Fryberg J, but the matter settled on 6 November 2007 before the conclusion of the trial. This case was conducted as an “electronic trial” with the use of technology developed within the court. This was the first case in Queensland to employ this technology at trial level. The Court���s aim was to find a means to capture the key benefits which are offered by the more sophisticated trial presentation software of commercial service providers, in a way that was inexpensive for the parties and would facilitate the adoption of technology at trial much more broadly than has been the case to date.

An evaluation of the Australian Capital Territory Sexual Assault Reform Program (SARP): Final Report

In 2005 the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the Australian Federal Police (AFP) produced a report, Responding to sexual assault: The challenge of change (DPP & AFP 2005), which made 105 recommendations for reforming the way sexual offence cases are handled by the ACT’s criminal justice system. The Sexual Assault Reform Program (SARP) is one key initiative developed in response to these recommendations. Managed by the ACT Justice and Community Safety Directorate (JACS), SARP’s main objective is to improve aspects of the criminal justice system relating to: processes and support for victims of sexual offences as they progress through the system; attrition in sexual offence matters in the criminal justice system; and coordination and collaboration among the agencies involved. In November 2007 the ACT Attorney-General announced $4 million of funding for several SARP reforms. This funding provided for additional victim support staff; a dedicated additional police officer, prosecutor and legal policy officer; and an upgrade of equipment for the Supreme Court and Magistrates Court, including improvements in technology to assist witnesses in giving evidence, and the establishment of an off-site facility to allow witnesses to give evidence from a location outside of the court. In addition, the reform agenda included a number of legislative amendments that changed how evidence can be given by victims of sexual and family violence offences, children and other vulnerable witnesses. The primary objectives of these legislative changes are to provide an unintimidating, safe environment for vulnerable witnesses (including sexual offence complainants) to give evidence and to obtain prompt statements from witnesses to improve the quality of evidence captured (DPP 2009: 13). The current evaluation The funding for SARP reforms also provided for a preliminary evaluation of the reforms; this report outlines findings from the evaluation. The evaluation sought to address whether the program has met its key objectives: better support for victims, lower attrition rates and improved coordination and collaboration among agencies involved in administering SARP. The evaluation was conducted in two stages and involved a mixed-methods approach. During stage 1 key indicators for the evaluation were developed with stakeholders. During stage 2 quantitative data were collected by stakeholders and provided to the AIC for analysis. Qualitative interviews were also conducted with service delivery providers, and with a small number (n=5) of victim/survivors of sexual offences whose cases had recently been resolved in the ACT criminal justice system. The current evaluation is preliminary in nature. As the SARP reforms will take time to become entrenched within the ACT’s criminal justice system, some of the impacts of the reforms may not yet be evident. Nonetheless, this evaluation provides an insight into how well the SARP reforms have been implemented to date, as well as key areas that could be addressed in the future. Key findings from the preliminary evaluation are outlined briefly below.

Australian copyright regimes and political economy of music

In this chapter I review the history of copyright in Australia through a singular and exemplary ruling of the Australian High Court made in 2012 and then relate that to the declining fortunes of Australian recorded music professionals. The case in point is Phonographic Performance Company [PPCA] of Australia Limited v Commonwealth of Australia [2012] HCA 8 (hereafter, HCA 8 2012). The case encapsulates the history of copyright law in Australia, with the judicial decision drawing substantive parts of its rationale from the Statute of Anne (8 Anne, c. 19, 1710), as well as copyright acts that regulated the Australian markets prior to 1968. More importantly the High Court decision serves to delineate some important political economic aspects of the recorded music professional in Australia and demonstrates Attali’s (1985) assertion that copyright is the mechanism through which composers are, by statute, literally excluded from capitalistic engagement as ‘productive labour’.

Private lawyers in contemporary society : Australia

Admission to practice law in Australia falls under the general supervisory power of supreme court judges in the various jurisdictions. The degree of supervision varies among jurisdictions, but the judiciary generally is responsible for setting the educational requirements for admission. A variety of admission boards perform a number of administrative and supervisory functions; for example, determining whether a particular law school's degree satisfies educational requirements for admission...