Merchant seamen and the law.

"Originally published by Pilot, Education and Publicity Department of the National Maritime Union."

Status report on law of the sea conference. Hearing, Ninety-third Congress, first session [Ninety-fifth Congress, first session]

Pt. 6 hearings before Subcommittee on Public Lands and Resources of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate

A treatise on maritime contracts of letting to hire,

Mode of access: Internet.

L'hypothèque maritime au point de vue théorique et pratique, avec introduction concernant le crédit maritime en France avant la Loi du 10 décembre et suivie d'annexes, comprenant entre autres documents, les modèles des registres hypothécaires, les formules de l'administration et certains contrats d'hypothèque maritime usités à l'étranger,

Includes bibliographical references.

The law of the sea : a manual of the principles of admiralty law for students, mariners, and ship operators /

Mode of access: Internet.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea : hearing before the Committee on International Relations, House of Representatives, One Hundred Eighth Congress, second session, May 12, 2004.

"Serial no. 108-136."

Views from Hamburg : the Juno Trader case or how to make sense of the coastal State's rights in the light of its duty of prompt release

Special edition: The United Nations and international legal order - the case of the Juno Trader - on 18 December 2004, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea ordered the prompt release of a refrigerated cargo vessel and its cargo for fisheries violations in an exclusive economic zone - Tribunal unanimously decided that the vessel and cargo be released, upon posting of a bond in the form of a bank guarantee - crew should be free to leave without conditions - in this case, on prompt release, the Tribunal made valuable contributions to existing case law on the issue - shows that specialised tribunals may perform a decentralised application of the international rule of law - crystallises international fundamental standards of fairness and human rights.

Statutory protections from forfeiture of a leasehold estate following Apriaden Pty Ltd v Seacrest Pty Ltd

In Apriaden Pty Ltd v Seacrest Pty Ltd the Victorian Court of Appeal decided that termination of a lease under common law contractual principles following repudiation is an alternative to reliance upon an express forfeiture provision in the lease and that it is outside the sphere of statutory protections given against the enforcing of a forfeiture. The balance of authority supports the first aspect of the decision. This article focuses on the second aspect of it, which is a significant development in the law of leases. The article considers the implications of this decision for essential terms of clauses in leases, argues that common law termination for breach of essential terms should be subject to compliance with these statutory requirements and, as an alternative, suggests a way forward through appropriate law reform, considering whether the recent Victorian reform goes far enough.

The implication of a term of good faith in commercial leases

Much has been written in the past decade on the subject of the implication of a term of good faith in contracts in Australia, particularly since the judgment Priestley JA in Renard Constructions (ME) Pty Ltd v Minister for Public Works (1992) 26 NSWLR 234. Except for an early article by Rachael Mulheron, 'Good Faith and Commercial Leases: New Opportunities for the Tenant' (1996) 4 APLJ 223, very little else has been written with respect to the possible application of the doctrine to the commercial leases.With the advent of two later New South Wales Supreme Court decisions Alcatel Australia Ltd v Scarcella (1998) 44 NSWLR 349 and, more recently, Advance Fitness v Bondi Diggers [1999] NSWSC 264, the question of the application of the doctrine in the commercial leasing context has been examined. This article briefly considers the nature and substance of the doctrine against the background of the relationship of lessor and lessee and examines in some depth the Australian decisions on commercial leases where it has been sought, unsuccessfully, to apply the doctrine. The article concludes by suggesting that as a standard commercial lease usually covers the field of agreement between lessor and lessee and as a lessee has a high degree of statutory protection derived from equitable principles, there may be little room for the operation of the doctrine in this legal environment.

The implication of a term of good faith in commercial leases — A brief response

By way of response to Professor Duncan's article,1 this article examines the theoretical basis for the implication of contractual terms, particularly the implication of a term at law. In this regard the recent decision of Barrett J in Overlook v Foxtel [2002] NSWSC 17 is considered, to the extent that it provides guidance concerning the implication of an obligation of good faith in the context of a commercial contract. A number of observations are made which may be considered likely to have application to the relationship of commercial landlord and tenant. The conclusion reached is that although the commercial landlord and tenant contractual relationship is highly regulated, this may not deny a remedy to a tenant who is the victim of a landlord's 'bad faith'. Finally, the article concludes by considering the extent to which it may be possible to contractually exclude the implied obligation of good faith.