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.

Sentencing of indigenous offenders in Victoria

It is common knowledge, especially in the context of the findings of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (RCIADIC),' that indigenous persons are over-represented at all stages of the criminal justice system. Unfortunately, little has changed since the RCIADIC and indigenous representation in prisons throughout the states and territories of Australia remains at high levels. What has come to prominence since the RCIADIC, particularly through the findings of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission in the 1997 report Bringing Them Home, is the notion of the Stolen Generation. For practitioners with indigenous clients, an important matter that may be put in mitigation is the effect of belonging to the Stolen Generation in terms of offering not only an explanation for offending, but also in terms of submissions put forward on behalf of the client pertaining to disposition. In this context, the Victorian Court of Appeal decision in R v Fuller-Cust is an important one, particularly the dissenting judgment of Eames J. His Honour, in a persuasive and well-reasoned judgment, suggests a method of sentencing indigenous offenders that relates questions of Aboriginality, the Stolen Generation and punishment.

A tale of action, suspense and drama : Village Roadshow’s buy-back scheme

The experience of Village Roadshow, in its two failed attempts to have a share buy-back scheme approved by the Supreme Court, sounds a warning to companies and their legal advisers about the pitfalls in presentation of such schemes to shareholders.

Doing harder time : the effects of imprisonment as a factor in sentencing

A strong link between the offender’s ill-health and the likely adverse effects of imprisonment needs to be made if the court is to be persuaded that this should be a mitigating factor in sentencing.

Capping the SRO's sweet tooth

The consequences of the State Revenue Office's (SRO) liking for fixtures and its liberal interpretation of the definition of chattels have been coming before the Supreme Court regularly.

Ethics-a lifelong journey

It is in the interests of society as a whole and lawyers as individuals that lawyers practise their profession ethically. But what exactly are "professional ethics"?

The evolution of sentencing

The Sentencing Advisory Council's addition to the Victorian Criminal Justice landscape opens the way for Victorian sentencing law and practice to become a more socially acceptable, constructive, and forensic practice, this article suggests a blueprint for a more coherent and justifiable system of sentencing