SYDNEY LAW REVIEW最新文献

Community Values and Australian Jurisprudence* 社区价值与澳大利亚法理学*

IF 0.8

SYDNEY LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2020-09-10 DOI: 10.4324/9781003073574-14

J. Braithwaite

引用次数: 0

The Liability of Australian Online Intermediaries 澳大利亚网络中介机构的责任

IF 0.8

SYDNEY LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2018-01-01 DOI: 10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780198837138.013.12

Kylie Pappalardo, Nicolas Suzor

{"title":"The Liability of Australian Online Intermediaries","authors":"Kylie Pappalardo, Nicolas Suzor","doi":"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780198837138.013.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780198837138.013.12","url":null,"abstract":"This article provides a comprehensive review of the current state of Australian online intermediary liability law across different doctrines. Different doctrines in Australian law employ a range of different tests for determining when an actor will be liable for the actions of a third party. So far, these primarily include cases brought under the laws of defamation, racial vilification, misleading and deceptive conduct, contempt of court, and copyright. These bodies of law are conceptually different and derive from different historical contexts, and the courts have generally applied them in isolation. We show that the basis on which third parties are liable for the actions of individuals online is confusing and, viewed as a whole, largely incoherent. We show how the principle limiting devices of liability across all of these schemes – intention, passivity, and knowledge – are ineffective in articulating a clear distinction for circumstances in which intermediaries will not be held liable. The result is a great deal of uncertainty. We argue that intermediary liability law should develop by focusing on the concept of responsibility, and that existing principles in tort jurisprudence and theory can help to guide and unify the different standards for liability.","PeriodicalId":45086,"journal":{"name":"SYDNEY LAW REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"61598002","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Reasons, reasonableness and intelligible justification in judicial review 司法审查的理由、合理性和可理解的正当理由

IF 0.8

SYDNEY LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2015-12-01 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3661007

L. Mcdonald

{"title":"Reasons, reasonableness and intelligible justification in judicial review","authors":"L. Mcdonald","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3661007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3661007","url":null,"abstract":"Australian courts have not recognised a general obligation to give reasons for administrative decisions. This article considers two contexts in which the inadequacy of reasons may nonetheless give rise to legal consequences: first, where there is a breach of a statutory obligation to give reasons and, second, where deficiencies in justification are relevant to the application of the unreasonableness ground of review. The aim is to contribute to a clearer understanding of the ways in which the inadequacy of reasons may reveal or constitute reviewable errors. More broadly, the article considers how review of the adequacy of reasons fits within the conceptual framework of judicial review in Australia given the propensity for a procedural obligation to give reasons to invite analysis of the substance of reasons. A possible strategy to limit any slide from the review of 'procedural' reason-giving obligations into 'substantive' review is to distinguish 'intelligible' reasons and 'persuasive' reasons. The overall argument is that although the concept of intelligibility is being explored in the cases, even minimal intelligibility requirements will have substantive elements and, further, there is as yet little judicial guidance as to how any inquiry into the intelligibility of reasons can be quarantined from broader substantive questions about the persuasiveness of justifications.","PeriodicalId":45086,"journal":{"name":"SYDNEY LAW REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68619972","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Does an Improved Experience of Law School Protect Students Against Depression, Anxiety and Stress? An Empirical Study of Wellbeing and the Law School Experience of LLB and JD Students 改善法学院的学习体验能保护学生免受抑郁、焦虑和压力的影响吗?法学学士和法学博士学生幸福感与法学院经历的实证研究

IF 0.8

SYDNEY LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2012-09-16 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.2147547

Wendy Larcombe, Letty C Tumbaga, I. Malkin, P. Nicholson, Orania Tokatlidis

{"title":"Does an Improved Experience of Law School Protect Students Against Depression, Anxiety and Stress? An Empirical Study of Wellbeing and the Law School Experience of LLB and JD Students","authors":"Wendy Larcombe, Letty C Tumbaga, I. Malkin, P. Nicholson, Orania Tokatlidis","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2147547","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2147547","url":null,"abstract":"Law students in Australia experience high rates of depression and anxiety. This article reports findings from an empirical study investigating the relation between law students’ levels of psychological distress and their experiences of law school. The study was undertaken at Melbourne Law School and the sample included students from both the LLB and JD programs. While Melbourne JD students expressed a significantly higher level of satisfaction with studying law, and their course experience, than Melbourne LLB students, there were no statistically significant differences in the levels of depression, anxiety and stress reported by students in each cohort. This finding suggests that overall course satisfaction does not have a direct effect on students’ levels of psychological distress. More particularly, it indicates that various program features that improve students’ experience of law school do not automatically result in improved levels of student wellbeing. In this way, the study offers new insight into the relationship between students’ experiences of law school and their levels of psychological distress.","PeriodicalId":45086,"journal":{"name":"SYDNEY LAW REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2012-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67949981","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 42

The human genome, property of all: opportunities under the ALRC inquiry into gene patenting and human health. 人类基因组，所有人的财产:在ALRC对基因专利和人类健康的调查下的机会。

IF 0.8

SYDNEY LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2004-09-01

John Paul Hinojosa

{"title":"The human genome, property of all: opportunities under the ALRC inquiry into gene patenting and human health.","authors":"John Paul Hinojosa","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article highlights the revolutionary and dramatic implications brought about by the advances in genetics. Among the myriad of legal problems involved, gene patenting is regarded as one of the most controversial. In a critical evaluation of the current inquiry into gene patenting and human health, the author argues that the Australian Law Reform Commission falls short of a thorough recommendation by failing to grant due recognition to the Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights. Starting with the fundamental premise that the human genome is the 'heritage of humanity', it is argued that the fruits of genetic research must flow back to humankind, and any law reform process must thereby ensure that the economic and health benefits of genetic research are available to all. Specifically, the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) should be amended to include the 'medical treatment' defence to patent infringement, following the lead of overseas jurisdictions. It should also incorporate an 'experimental use' defence to ensure an unhindered approach to research and development. In doing so, the patent law regime will be truly balancing the interests at stake, which will accommodate more fully Australia's domestic needs and international obligations.</p>","PeriodicalId":45086,"journal":{"name":"SYDNEY LAW REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2004-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25894485","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Being Ms B: B, autonomy and the nature of legal regulation. 作为B女士:B，自治和法律监管的性质。

IF 0.8

SYDNEY LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2004-03-01

Derek Morgan, Kenneth Veitch

引用次数: 0

Regulatory approaches to genetic testing in insurance. 保险中基因检测的监管方法。

IF 0.8

SYDNEY LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2002-06-01

Julie-Anne Tarr

引用次数: 0

Data linkage, health research and privacy: regulating data flows in Australia's health information system. 数据链接、卫生研究和隐私:规范澳大利亚卫生信息系统中的数据流动。