Current Law Journal Content
Washington & Lee Law School
  Current Law Journal Content
                  an index to legal periodicals
 


  Australian Business Law Review   (Australia)
  Volume 36, Number 2, April 2008
  homepage                   other issues
 
  • EDITORIAL
        p.77                                                                                        +cite    

  • ARTICLES
  • Maritime law and the TPA as a "mandatory statute" in Australia and England: Confusion and consternation?
        Kate Lewins
        p.78                                                                                        +cite        
        This article is concerned with the clash between party autonomy in contracts and mandatory rules of a State in the context of maritime law. Where litigation takes place in Australia, the Trade Practices Act (TPA), as a mandatory law of the forum, applies to the contract. However, in many transnational contracts involving Australian parties, the parties have agreed that the law of a different country is to govern their contract or granted a non-Australian court exclusive jurisdiction over any disputes. Alternatively they may have agreed to submit disputes to arbitration outside Australia. Commonly the parties choose English Courts or London Arbitration. In doing so, the parties have exercised a choice, which, if permitted to operate, will take their contract out of the reach of the mandatory law of Australia. How do Australian and English courts treat this apparent clash of policies and what is the consequence for contractual parties who find themselves litigating a jurisdictional dispute both in Australia and England?
  • Environmental reporting in the Australian mining industry: Complying with regulation or meeting international best practice?
        Michael Overell, Larelle Chapple and Peter M. Clarkson
        p.137                                                                                      +cite        
        It is nearly 10 years since the introduction of s 299(l)(f) Corporations Act, which requires the disclosure of information regarding a company's environmental performance within its annual report. This provision has generated considerable debate in the years since its introduction, fundamentally between proponents of either a voluntary or mandatory environmental reporting framework. This study examines the adequacy of the current regulatory framework. The environmental reporting practices of 24 listed companies in the resources industries are assessed relative to a standard set by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Sustainability Reporting Guidelines. These Guidelines are argued to represent "international best practice" in environmental reporting and a "scorecard" approach is used to score the quality of disclosure according to this voluntary benchmark. Larger companies in the sample tend to report environmental information over and above the level required by legislation. Some, but not all companies present a stand-alone environmental/sustainability report. However, smaller companies provide minimal information in compliance with s 299(1)(f). The findings indicate that "international best practice" environmental reporting is unlikely to be achieved by Australian companies under the current regulatory framework. In the current regulatory environment that scrutinises s 299(1)(f), this article provides some preliminary evidence of the quality of disclosures generated in the Australian market.

  • COMPETITION LAW AND MARKET REGULATION -- Stephen Corones
  • Small business operators and professionals: Ignorance of the law is no excuse
        p.155                                                                                      +cite    

  • BOOK REVIEW — Peter Lithgow
  • The Law of Real Property Mortgages by Duncan, W.D. and Dixon, W.M.
        p.159                                                                                      +cite