Qualified indefeasibility and the careless mortgagee

In recent years a great deal of case law has been generated in relation to mortgages where the mortgagee has not engaged in adequate identity verification of the mortgagor and the mortgage has subsequently been found to be forged. As a result, careless mortgagee provisions operate in Queensland as an exception to indefeasibility. Similar provisions are expected to commence soon in New South Wales. This article examines the mortgagee’s position with the benefit of indefeasibility and then considers the impact of the careless mortgagee provisions on the rights of a mortgagee under a forged mortgage, concluding that the provisions significantly change the dynamic between a registered mortgagee and registered owner who has not signed the mortgage. These provisions appear to give the mortgagee a conditional indefeasibility, with the intention of reducing the State’s exposure to the payment of compensation in the case of identity fraud. They are however, more successful in the case of forgery by a third party rather than forgery by a co-owner.

Surrogacy and IVF

While in the past surrogacy was illegal in Queensland, since June 2010 the Surrogacy Act 2010 (Qld) (“the Act”) has made altruistic surrogacy arrangements lawful in Queensland. In addition, it provides a mechanism for transfer of legal parentage from the surrogate to the person(s) wishing to have a child (the intended parent(s)). Commercial surrogacy – where a payment, reward or other material benefit of advantage (other than the reimbursement of the “birth mother’s surrogacy costs” (s11 of the Act) is made for entering into a surrogacy arrangement – remains unlawful. The paramount guiding principle underpinning the Act is that of the wellbeing and best interests of a child born as a result of surrogacy. The Surrogacy Act 2010 (Qld) allows a single person or a couple (heterosexual or same sex couples) to enter into an agreement with a woman, and her partner (if she has one), to become pregnant with the intention that the child will be relinquished to the intended parent(s). The Act also provides a mechanism for the intended parent(s) to be legally recognised as the parent(s) of the child. In order for the intended parent(s) to be legally recognised (via a parentage order, discussed below) it must be shown that the surrogacy arrangement was entered into when all the parties were over 25 years of age and the intended parent(s) are male or, in a heterosexual or lesbian couple the female(s) are not likely to conceive or give birth to a healthy child due to medical reasons. The arrangement must be entered into before the surrogate becomes pregnant and all parties must have obtained independent legal advice and counselling about the proposed arrangement, and evidence of this is required at the time a parentage order is applied for. For the purposes of the Act it does not matter how the surrogate conceives the child or if the child is genetically related to the parties. During the period of the pregnancy, the surrogate has the right to manage her pregnancy in the way she wishes. Although she cannot profit from acting as a surrogate, section 11 states that she is entitled to surrogacy costs. These include, for example, reasonable medical costs related to pregnancy and the birth of the child; counselling and legal costs associated with the surrogacy arrangement; actual lost earnings because of leave taken during pregnancy or following birth and any reasonable travel expenses incurred. The surrogacy arrangement itself is not legally enforceable; however, obligations to pay a surrogate’s surrogacy costs are enforceable unless she chooses not to relinquish the child to the intending parents. While the Act does not specifically deal with the situation where the surrogate decides she is unprepared to relinquish the child to the intended parents, there have been examples where parties have entered into these kinds of arrangements, and the arrangements have become difficult. For example, the Family Court case of Re Evelyn (1998) FLC 92–807 involved a child born to a surrogate mother who decided not to surrender her. The child was the genetic child of the surrogate mother and the husband of the couple who had contracted with the surrogate mother. Both sets of parents brought proceedings in the court, seeking that the child live with them. In hearing the application, the court applied the paramount principle of the ‘best interests of the child’. The court made clear that there is no presumption in favour of the birth mother, although in this case the court found that the child may be better placed with the surrogate mother’s family.

The challenge of assessing professional competence in work integrated learning

A fundamental aspect of work integrated learning (WIL) is the development of professional competence, the ability of students to perform in the work place. Alignment theory therefore suggests that the assessment of WIL should include an assessment of students’ demonstration of professional competence in the workplace. The assessment of professional competence in WIL is, however, problematic. It may be impractical for the academic supervisor to directly assess professional competence if there is a large number of students in external placements. If evidence of professional competence is provided by the student, the student’s ability to articulate his or her own capabilities will interfere with the validity of the assessment. If evidence of professional competency is provided by the supervisor then the assessment is heavily dependent on the individual supervisor and may be unreliable. This paper will examine the literature relating to the assessment of professional competence in WIL. The paper will be informed by the author’s experience in coordinating a WIL subject in an undergraduate law course. It will recommend that a mix of evidence provided by the student, the workplace supervisor and the academic supervisor should be used to assess professional competence in WIL.

Juvenile justice and truancy legislation : The move towards parental responsibilisation in Queensland

Much current Queensland media rhetoric, government policy and legislation on truancy and youth justice appears to be based on ideas of responsibilisation – of sheeting responsibility for children’s behaviour back onto their parents. This article examines the evidence of parental responsibility provisions in juvenile justice and truancy legislation in Queensland and the drivers behind this approach. It considers recent legislative initiatives as part of an international trend toward making parents ‘responsible’ for the wrongs of their children. It identifies the parental responsibility rhetoric appearing in recent ministerial statements and associated media reports. It then asks the questions – are these legislative provisions being enforced? And if so, are they successful? Are they simply adding to the administrative burdens placed on teachers and schools, and the socioeconomic burdens placed on already disadvantaged parents? Parental responsibility provisions have been discussed at length in the context of juvenile offending and research suggests that punishing parents for the acts of their children does not decrease delinquency. The paper asks how, as a society, we intend to evaluate these punitive measures against parents?

The certainty of tax in insolvency : where does the ATO fit?

There are several ways that the Commissioner of Taxation may indirectly obtain priority over unsecured creditors. This is contrary to the principle of pari passu, a principle endorsed by the 1988 Harmer Report as one that is a fundamental objective of the law of insolvency. As the law and practice of Australia's taxation regime evolves, the law is being drafted in a manner that is inconsistent with the principle of pari passu. The natural consequence of this development is that it places at risk the capacity of corporate and bankruptcy laws to coexist and cooperate with taxation laws. This article posits that undermining the consistency of Commonwealth legislative objectives is undesirable. The authors suggest that one means of addressing the inconsistency is to examine whether there is a clearly aligned theoretical basis for the development of these areas of law and the extent that alignment addresses these inconsistencies. This forms the basis for the recommendations made around such inconsistencies using statutory priorities as an exemplar.

Regenerateengageexperiment in 2011! - News from Spatial Science Discipline at QUT

Abstract: Goals and potential impacts of QUT corporate Blueprint3 framework, university has made significant investments in physical infrastructure, and investments to improve staff profiles, particularly in relation to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. The most significant physical change to the Faculty’s infrastructure has seen new workshop and teaching and research spaces located in Science and Technology precinct under construction. Also includes Alumni news, input and output numbers Spatial Science discussion, Work Integrated Learning (WIL) in 2011, some key teaching administrative dates in 2011.

Borders, mobility and technologies of control

Territorial borders are taking on a new significance, the implications of which are relatively unexplored within the discipline of criminology. This book presents the first systematic attempt to develop a critical criminology of the border and offers a unique treatment of the impact of globalisation and mobility. It focuses on borders and the significance of the activities which take place on and around them. For many the border is an everyday reality, a space in which to live, a land necessary to cross. For states the border space increasingly requires protection and defence; is at the centre of state ideology and performance; is the site for investing significant political and material resources, and is ultimately ungovernable. Providing a wealth of case material from Australia, Europe and North America, it is for students, academics, and practitioners working in the areas of criminology, migration, human geography, international law and politics, globalisation, sociology and cultural anthropology.

Actions for declaratory or injunctive relief by the Corporate Regulator under s 471B of the Corporations Act

This article by Ben McEniery discusses the matters a court will consider when leave to commence or proceed against a company in liquidation is sought not by a creditor seeking to prove a debt, but by the corporate regulator pursuing declaratory or injunctive relief.

To have your caveat and claim it, too : steps to take to protect an interest in land or water allocation

Caveats as protection for unregistered interests - lapsing and non-lapsing caveats - caveator - use only in appropriate circumstances

Catch up on passing off : what you need to know about this tricky tort

Advice for assisting clients on the law relating to passing off - elements of passing off - overlap with consumer protection and trade mark law - reputation - misrepresentation - damages and remedies

Loss of chance in medical negligence claims now a lost cause?

The question whether the loss of chance of a better medical outcome in cases of medical negligence should be recognised as actionable damage is ‘a question which has divided courts and commentators throughout the common law world.’ In April 2010, the High Court handed down its anticipated decision in the case of Tabet (by her Tutor Sheiban) v Gett (2010) 240 CLR 537. The issue considered by the court was whether the appellant could claim in negligence for the loss of a chance of a better medical outcome. This issue had not been considered by the High Court previously, the most relevant cases being Rufo v Hosking (2004) 61 NSWLR 678 and Gavalas v Singh (2001) 3 VLR 404. Claiming for a loss of chance in a personal injury action raises questions as to recognised damage and causation, and the members of the High Court considered both of these.

Civil Liability and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2010 (Qld)

On 17 March 2010, the Civil Liability and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2010 (Qld) was assented to.