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


  Australian Law Journal   (Australia)
  Volume 82, Number 5, May 2008
  homepage                   other issues
 

  • CURRENT ISSUES — Editor: Mr Justice P W Young AO
  • Melbourne and Brisbane ALJ Conferences
        p.295                                                                                      +cite    
  • Australian Federation
        p.295                                                                                      +cite    
  • "Nothing dodgy here, move along"
        p.295                                                                                      +cite    
  • Court delays
        p.295                                                                                      +cite    
  • Cost of inquiries
        p.296                                                                                      +cite    
  • Litigation funders to be regulated
        p.296                                                                                      +cite    
  • Performance indicators
        p.297                                                                                      +cite    
  • Limits on cross-examination
        p.298                                                                                      +cite    
  • Grandfather's notebook
        p.298                                                                                      +cite    

  • CONVEYANCING AND PROPERTY — Editor: Peter Butt
  • When is a right of pre-emption exhausted?
        p.300                                                                                      +cite    
  • Priority for option to purchase in registered lease
        p.301                                                                                      +cite    
  • Purchaser entitled to terminate for vendor's failure to complete building in "proper and tradesmanlike manner"
        p.302                                                                                      +cite    
  • A short note on court-imposed easements
        p.303                                                                                      +cite    

  • PRACTICAL ADVOCACY — Professor John Harber Phillips AC QC
  • Happenings in court
        p.304                                                                                      +cite    

  • INTERNATIONAL FOCUS — Ryszard Piotrowicz
  • United Nations Declaration on Indigenous Peoples
        p.306                                                                                      +cite    

  • PEOPLE IN THE LAW — Geoff Lindsay SC
  • Justice Hilary Ruth Penfold (ACT)
        p.312                                                                                      +cite    
  • Justice Roger Boland (NSW)
        p.312                                                                                      +cite    
  • Justice Lucy McCallum (NSW)
        p.313                                                                                      +cite    

  • RECENT CASES — Mr Justice P W Young AO
  • Another blow to Cameron v Hogan
        p.315                                                                                      +cite    
  • Rights of domestic co-owners when relationships sour
        p.315                                                                                      +cite    
  • Partnership: Fiduciary duties
        p.316                                                                                      +cite    
  • Confiscation of proceeds of crime
        p.316                                                                                      +cite    
  • Crime: Outraging public decency
        p.316                                                                                      +cite    
  • How wrong is wrong?
        p.317                                                                                      +cite    
  • Easements: Unsolicited permission to use track
        p.317                                                                                      +cite    
  • Contract: Use of subsequent conduct of the parties
        p.318                                                                                      +cite    
  • Do problem gamblers have actions for damages?
        p.318                                                                                      +cite    
  • What are exceptional circumstances?
        p.319                                                                                      +cite    
  • Bankruptcy: Transactions at an undervalue
        p.319                                                                                      +cite    
  • Valid and invalid protection: Constitution, s92
        p.320                                                                                      +cite    

  • ARTICLES
  • DOLORES UMBRIDGE AND POLICY AS LEGAL MAGIC
        Justice R S French
        p.322                                                                                      +cite        
        Policy in the law is said to be an unruly horse. The concept requires definition. It may refer to normative principles informing the development and application of the common law. In the context of statute law it usually refers to the purpose said to be served by a statute in justification of constructional choices and the application of broadly stated legal rules and standards. Not all statutes are informed by coherent policy. Some reflect conflicting policies arising out of political compromises. Nevertheless, consideration of the question whether a statute is informed by a policy and if so what that policy is, is an inescapable part of its construction and application. In this sense policy is a helpful guardian of the rule of law.
  • IN-HOUSE COUNSEL AND CLIENT LEGAL PRIVILEGE: THE ISSUE OF INDEPENDENCE
        Stuart Westgarth
        p.333                                                                                      +cite        
        In assessing whether a confidential communication between an in-house lawyer and a client is properly the subject of a privilege claim, the courts have been concerned to establish, among other things, that the in-house lawyer was "independent" and that the giving of independent advice was not subverted by the employment relationship. Some cases have revealed a presumption against the independence of in-house lawyers. The Australian Law Reform Commission has recently commented on the issue. It is timely for in-house counsel to review how they would go about establishing their independence if required. This article examines the relevant cases and principles.
  • EVOLUTION OF THE COMMON LAW PRINCIPLE OF "ISSUE WAIVER"
        Andrew Corkhill and Madeleine Selwyn
        p.338                                                                                      +cite        
        The term "issue waiver" is an established part of the Australian legal lexicon. And yet, considerable confusion remains over precisely what issue waiver is, and when it will arise to defeat a claim of legal professional privilege. This article seeks to redress this confusion by examining the development of the common law principle of issue waiver in Australia. The article charts the evolution of issue waiver in Australian case law, from its origins as a distinct ground of waiver to its eventual subsumption under the general principle of implied waiver. In so doing, it pays particular attention to the impact this evolutionary process has had on the scope of the issue waiver exception to legal professional privilege.

  • BOOK REVIEWS
  • Trusts Law in Australia by Denis Ong
        p.349                                                                                      +cite    
  • Retroactivity and the Common Law by Ben Juratowitch
        p.349                                                                                      +cite    

  • OBITUARY
  • Justice Hans Raj Khanna
        p.351                                                                                      +cite