*Please note that the links to the content in this Part will direct you to Westlaw AU.
To purchase an article, please email: LTA.Service@thomsonreuters.com or contact us on 1300 304 195 (Australian customers) or +61 2 8587 7980 (international customers) during business hours (Mon-Fri, 8am-6pm AST).
The latest issue of the The Queensland Lawyer (Volume 38 Part 2) contains the following material:
EDITORIAL – General Editor: Andrew M West
- The Human Rights Act 2019
COMMERCIAL LAW – Editor: Dr Clive Turner
- Construction of a Provision to Act in “Utmost Good Faith” in a Commercial Contract: Sentinel Robina Office Pty Ltd v Clarence Property Corp Pty Ltd  QCA 314 – Clive Turner
CONVEYANCING AND PROPERTY LAW – Editor: Dr Bill Dixon
- Tripple A Pty Ltd v WIN Television Qld Pty Ltd  QCA 246 – Dominic Fawcett
CRIMINAL LAW – Editor: Andrew M West
- Managing Prisoners’ Estates – A M West
The landmark 2018 Queensland Government Report into Cyberbullying provided recommendations on the modern day evil of cyberbullying between students at school. While no one can doubt the worth of that Report, it is fair to say that a substantial omission from the terms of reference was upstream bullying (the bullying of School Principals and Teachers by students and parents). After all, if a student sees their parents successfully bullying a Teacher or School Principal, won’t that child learn that bullying works? And will that “lesson” not undermine the good the Report is attempting to achieve? This article addresses the law pertaining to upstream bullying. It argues that the existing law is inadequate to protect school staff and there is a need for law reform. Given the recent findings of the 2019 survey into the wellbeing of School Principals this article should be useful for lawyers advising schools and also law reformers.
Is the three-year limitation period for most personal injuries actions really the “end of the road” for plaintiffs? Section 31 of the Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld) may provide a pathway. But it is one strewn with obstacles. This article examines s 31 and its many elements in light of cases of those fortunate enough to have availed of its provisions and some salutary decisions in which the plaintiffs were not so lucky.
International estate management poses several problems for testators, executors and for the courts. In 1973 the international community met in Washington, DC to discuss the work of the UNIDROIT Convention Providing a Uniform Law on the Form of an International Will (Washington Convention) that annexes the Uniform Law on the Form of the International Will (Uniform Law). Despite attending the Washington Conference, Australia did not consider enacting uniform legislation in the States and Territories until almost 40 years after the Washington Conference was held. There has been little discourse on the Washington Convention and the Uniform Law in Australia since that time. This article argues that there is a need for a renewed discourse on international wills that seeks to promote the political, economic and client advantages of the Washington Convention and the Uniform Law in Australia.
REPORTS – Editor: Federal Circuit Court Judge Michael Jarrett
- Critchley v Schlumberger Oilfield Australia Pty Ltd
- Hong Minh Nguyen (t/a Mobile PC Doctor) v Sensis Pty Ltd
For the PDF version of the table of contents, click here: Qld Lawyer Vol 38 No 2 Contents.
For general queries, please contact: email@example.com.