scholarly journals Developing the Esperanto of quality

2001 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 7
Author(s):  
Jennifer W Majoor ◽  
Joseph E Ibrahim
Keyword(s):  
Health Care Providers ◽  
New South ◽  
Royal Infirmary ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
High Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
South Wales ◽  
Public Inquiry ◽  
Personal Performance ◽  
High Court Of Australia

Professionalism is a complex and ill-defined concept and the impending Report of the Public Inquiry into thepaediatric cardiac surgery service at the Bristol Royal Infirmary continues to heighten debate on the subject.Bolsin offers examples of operational definitions from the Privy Council (United Kingdom), the state healthauthorities in New South Wales and Victoria, and the High Court of Australia. He also provides an implicitdefinition of professionalism that encompasses the collection and use of personal performance data forindividual health care providers and organisations.

scholarly journals INTERPRETATION AND RECTIFICATION IN AUSTRALIA

2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 483-486 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul S. Davies
Keyword(s):  
New South ◽  
Common Law ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
High Court ◽  
South Wales ◽  
Housing Corporation ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
The Law ◽  
High Court Of Australia

Both interpretation and rectification continue to pose problems. Difficulties are compounded by blurring the boundary between the two. In Simic v New South Wales Land and Housing Corporation [2016] HCA 47, the High Court of Australia overturned the decisions of the lower courts which had held that performance bonds could be interpreted in a “loose” manner in order to correct a mistake. However, the documents could be rectified in order to reflect the actual intentions of the parties. This decision should be welcomed: the mistake was more appropriately corrected through the equitable jurisdiction than at common law. Significantly, the concurring judgments of French C.J. and Kiefel J. highlight that the law of rectification now seems to be different in Australia from the law in England. It is to be hoped that the English approach will soon be revisited (see further P. Davies, “Rectification versus Interpretation” [2016] C.L.J. 62).

scholarly journals OF ADVOCATES, DRUNKS AND OTHER PLAYERS: PLAIN TALES FROM AUSTRALIA

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-64
Author(s):  
Michael J Kirby CMG
Keyword(s):  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
High Court ◽  
Governing Body ◽  
South Wales ◽  
The Law ◽  
Bar Association ◽  
High Court Of Australia ◽  
Honorary Life

When I retired from judicial office after 34 years service (13 of them as a Justice of the High Court of Australia), I was richly rewarded for my labours by the practising Bar.  Here in England, Inner Temple did me the honour of electing me a Bencher.  I was proud to follow Peter Taylor to that office.  In Australia, the Australian Bar Association, the Law Council of Australia and the governing body of my home Bar, the New South Wales Bar Association, conferred on me honorary life memberships.  I say this not to boast but to illustrate the forgiving qualities of barristers for the assaults that judges inflict on them during service in the courts.

Some favourite fallacies about similar facts

Legal Studies ◽  
1988 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-47
Author(s):  
T.R.S. Allan
Keyword(s):  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
High Court ◽  
South Wales ◽  
High Court Of Australia

There can be few passages ofjudicial exegesis which have claimed more attention, analysis and controversy than Lord Herschell’s famous, or infamous, statement of principle in Makin u A-G for New South Wales. His Lordship had appeared to assert an absolute rule against adducing evidence of bad character in order to prove the defendant’s guilt on the basis ofhis criminal disposition; and in Boardman v DPP Lord Hailsham expressly approved this prohibition on use of the ‘forbidden chain of reasoning’. A recent judgment by Gibbs CJ in the High Court of Australia contains a lucid modern restatement of Lord Herschell’s principle:‘The prosecution cannot adduce evidence tending to show that the accused has been guilty ofcriminal acts other than those with which he is charged if the evidence shows only that he had a propensity to commit crime, or crime of a particular kind, or that he was the sort of person likely to have committed the crime charged.

Reflections of an Itinerant Judge in the Asia-Pacific Region

2000 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 311-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sir Anthony Mason
Keyword(s):  
New South ◽  
Solomon Islands ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
National Library ◽  
High Court ◽  
South Wales ◽  
National University ◽  
High Court Of Australia ◽  
The University

Since my retirement from the High Court of Australia in April 1995, I have pursued various activities. As Chairman of the National Library 1995-1998, National Fellow at the Australian National University and Chancellor of the University of New South Wales, I have been concerned with some current issues concerning libraries, including funding and copyright reform. My main purpose on this occasion is to speak about my experiences as a judicial rover in Fiji, the Solomon Islands and Hong Kong, jurisdictions in which I have been sitting as a Judge and as a lecturer at the Chinese National Judges College in Beijing.

The Authority of Privy Council Decisions in Australian Courts

1978 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 427-456
Author(s):  
Robert S. Geddes
Keyword(s):  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
High Court ◽  
South Wales ◽  
High Court Of Australia ◽  
Court Of Appeal ◽  
Judicial Hierarchy

During 1978, the High Court of Australia and the New South Wales Court of Appeal handed down decisions which announce a departure from the longstanding rule that decisions of the Privy Council bind all Australian Courts. In this article, Mr Geddes analyses these decisions and considers their future impact on the authority of Privy Council decisions in the various courts which make up the Australian judicial hierarchy.

The homosexual advance defence in Australia: An examination of sentencing practices and provocation law reform

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 576-592
Author(s):  
Rebecca McGeary ◽  
Kate Fitz-Gibbon
Keyword(s):  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
High Court ◽  
Lethal Violence ◽  
Legal Response ◽  
South Wales ◽  
High Court Of Australia ◽  
Judicial Treatment

In May 2015, the judgment of the High Court of Australia in Lindsay v The Queen reignited debate surrounding the use of the partial defence of provocation in cases involving a non-violent homosexual advance. Lindsay re-established the legal possibility that a man provoked enough to lose self-control and commit lethal violence in response to a non-violent homosexual advance could be convicted of manslaughter by reason of provocation rather than murder. The judgment arrived in the midst of two decades of national law reform activity, whereby all Australian jurisdictions have either introduced or proposed reform to abolish or restrict the application of the controversial partial defence of provocation. In doing so, cases involving a homosexual advance defence are increasingly shifting to the realm of sentencing. This article offers a timely analysis of the sentencing of homosexual advance defence cases in New South Wales and Queensland. In doing so, it examines the judicial treatment of a defendant’s claim of a ‘special sensitivity’ to a homosexual advance, problems arising from the private nature of an alleged homosexual advance and the treatment of intoxication in sentencing. It reveals that reform of legal categories alone may not be sufficient in ensuring a just legal response to homicides incited by alleged homosexual advances.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document