{"title":"Heydon on Contract","authors":"L. Aitken","doi":"10.38127/uqlj.v39i1.3899","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v39i1.3899","url":null,"abstract":"This eponymous book on the general part of the law of contract will be the standard Australian work for some time to come. It aims to provide a guide to that legion of legal readers ‘who are searching for basic statements of contract law’.","PeriodicalId":83293,"journal":{"name":"The University of Queensland law journal","volume":"25 1","pages":"152-156"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90488981","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}
{"title":"The Mistake of Fact Excuse in Queensland Rape Law","authors":"J. Crowe, Bri Lee","doi":"10.38127/uqlj.v39i1.2993","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v39i1.2993","url":null,"abstract":"This article considers the role of the excuse of mistake of fact in Queensland rape and sexual assault law. We argue that the excuse has undesirable and socially regressive consequences by allowing reference to factors such as the complainant’s social behaviour, relationship to the defendant or lack of overt resistance that are at odds with the definition of free and voluntary consent. The excuse has also led to problematic results in cases involving impaired capacity (such as intoxication, mental incapacity or linguistic incapacity) by the defendant or the complainant. We canvass two potential reforms aimed at addressing these issues. The first would render the excuse inapplicable to the issue of consent in rape and sexual assault cases, while the second would limit the excuse to address its most troubling outcomes.","PeriodicalId":83293,"journal":{"name":"The University of Queensland law journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45853211","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}
{"title":"Commercial Issues in Private International law","authors":"Sarah McKibbin","doi":"10.38127/uqlj.v39i1.3897","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v39i1.3897","url":null,"abstract":"Interest in Australian private international law has rekindled over the past decade. Australian courts are contending with more transnational litigation than ever before, facilitated by the ease with which people, business and information now cross borders.","PeriodicalId":83293,"journal":{"name":"The University of Queensland law journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44318323","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}
{"title":"Thinking Allowed in the Academy","authors":"Paul M. Taylor","doi":"10.38127/uqlj.v39i1.3893","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v39i1.3893","url":null,"abstract":"The recent Review of Freedom of Speech in Australian Higher Education Providers ('the Review'), overseen by the Hon Robert French AC, identified areas for improving freedom of speech and academic freedom, and to that end proposed the adoption of umbrella principles embedded in a Model Code. The Review's engagement with international human rights law standards was confined, even though many are binding on Australia. As universities consider implementing the Review's recommendations, this article reflects on the Model Code in the light particularly of the standards established by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ('ICCPR'). If the drafters of the Model Code had paid closer regard to the ICCPR and other international standards, the result may have been a scheme that more clearly and predictably distinguishes permissible from impermissible restriction on free speech and academic freedom, and gives greater priority to promoting the human rights of those in the academic community than to the institutional power to limit them.","PeriodicalId":83293,"journal":{"name":"The University of Queensland law journal","volume":"13 1","pages":"117-146"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73229616","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}
{"title":"The Three Queenslands","authors":"G. Taylor","doi":"10.38127/uqlj.v39i1.3889","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v39i1.3889","url":null,"abstract":"From 1890 to 1892, Sir Samuel Griffith, as Premier of Queensland, promoted a scheme under which Queensland would itself have been divided into a federation of initially three provinces — North, Central and South Queensland — and then two provinces, North and South Queensland. This startling idea would certainly have changed the map of Australia, probably permanently. At least at some points, the idea was expressed that each province would enter the Australian federation as a separate State and the Queensland federal government would simply be dissolved upon federation. The Bill to divide Queensland into a federation of two provinces passed the lower House of State Parliament but was defeated in the nominee Legislative Council. It then fell victim to the change of government consequent upon Griffith’s appointment as Chief Justice of Queensland, to the urgent problems presented by the economic depression, and even, from the conservative point of view, to the rise of labour in politics. Little has been known about this nearly successful plan until now. This article attempts to close that gap.","PeriodicalId":83293,"journal":{"name":"The University of Queensland law journal","volume":"60 1","pages":"33-83"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90318310","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}
{"title":"ANTITRUST DAMAGES IN EU LAW: THE INTERFACE OF MULTIFARIOUS HARMONISATION AND NATIONAL PROCEDURAL AUTONOMY","authors":"Albertina Albors-Llorens","doi":"10.17863/CAM.27824","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.27824","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":83293,"journal":{"name":"The University of Queensland law journal","volume":"28 1","pages":"139"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81607042","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}
{"title":"Judicial Power and the United Kingdom's Changing Constitution","authors":"M. Elliott","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3055862","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3055862","url":null,"abstract":"Judicial power, in any rule of law-based system, is a given. But how much is too much? That question has risen to particular prominence in recent years in the United Kingdom, where the judicial role has changed and grown in notable ways. In doing so, it has attracted criticism from some quarters, with charges of judicial overreach being made. This paper charts the growth of judicial power in the UK and considers how, given the particularities of the UK’s constitutional system, one might go about identifying the proper limits of judicial power. \u0000The paper begin by addressing the key constitutional parameters by reference to which the notions of judicial power and overreach have traditionally been calibrated in the UK. It then proceeds to trace the many senses in which the exercise of judicial power has grown, and considers the forces that have brought such developments about. Against that background, the paper contends that while the evolution of the judicial role evidences a reconceptualization, as distinct from the repudiation, of relevant fundamental constitutional principles, it should not be assumed that the UK constitution’s famous flexibility is limitless. To that end, the paper concludes by examining the recent and controversial judgments of the UK Supreme Court in the Evans and Miller cases, in which, in different ways, the proper limits of judicial power have been tested.","PeriodicalId":83293,"journal":{"name":"The University of Queensland law journal","volume":"20 1","pages":"273"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78649459","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}
{"title":"Contesting Public Service Fiduciary Accountability","authors":"Robert Flannigan","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3008800","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3008800","url":null,"abstract":"Every public service function attracts fiduciary accountability. The public/private distinction does not imply any variation in the application of the conventional proscription on opportunism. I have explained that elsewhere. Here I situate my analysis by contrasting the views that other writers recently have advanced. The approach usually employed by those commentators is to consider whether it is tenable or useful to extend ‘private’ fiduciary accountability to the ‘public’ sphere. The difficulty with several of the contributions is that they assert distorted conceptions of the conventional regulation. I will explain the main analytical departures in each case. I conclude that none of the contributions transcend the conventional formulation.","PeriodicalId":83293,"journal":{"name":"The University of Queensland law journal","volume":"59 1","pages":"7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77212753","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}
{"title":"The Importance of 'The Gap'","authors":"Emily L. Sherwin","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2817808","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2817808","url":null,"abstract":"One of the central dilemmas of law is what Larry Alexander has called \"the gap:\" general, determinate rules have significant benefits from the forward-looking perspective of a lawmaker, but generate outcomes that appear wrong from the perspective of individual actors. In this 25-year retrospective of Alexander's initial article on the gap, I examine a possible way out of the dilemma of the gap, and conclude that it does not work.","PeriodicalId":83293,"journal":{"name":"The University of Queensland law journal","volume":"21 1","pages":"47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86308508","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}
{"title":"Collegiality in the Law School","authors":"James Allan","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2562747","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2562747","url":null,"abstract":"Those of us who work in a university law school in the developed common law world are expected to publish, to teach and to some extent or other to serve on law school and university committees. There may also be an expectation that members of law faculties will on occasion perform a community service-type role and give public talks or draft reports to government enquiries or write for newspapers or anything along those lines.","PeriodicalId":83293,"journal":{"name":"The University of Queensland law journal","volume":"116 1","pages":"391-396"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88238265","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}
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
