*Please note that the links to the content in this Part will direct you to Westlaw AU.

To purchase an article, please email: [email protected] 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 Australian Journal of Administrative Law (Volume 31 Part 2) contains the following material:

EDITORIAL – Editors: Professor Matthew Groves and Professor Greg Weeks

CASENOTE – Editors: Professor Matthew Groves and Professor Greg Weeks

Articles

Decoding Justice: A Data-driven Approach to Evaluating and Improving the Administrative Review of Refugee Cases in Australia – Daniel Ghezelbash, Mia Bridle, Keyvan Dorostkar and Tsz-Kit Jeffrey Kwan

This article presents analysis of a data set of over 26,000 applications for review of Protection Visa decisions in Australia’s Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The data suggest that the rate at which applications for review are successful may vary based on the member who hears the case and a number of other factors. We outline how statistics of the nature analysed in our study could inform interventions and reforms aimed at improving the administrative review of Protection Visa cases, and outline lessons for the design and operation of Australia’s new Administrative Review Tribunal.

Non-disclosure of Relevant Material and Chapter III: The Tantalising Promise of Due Process Rights Protection by the Australian Constitution in the Gageler High Court Using Separation of Powers Principles – Anthony Gray and Pauline Collins

Recent times have seen an increase in the use of secrecy measures in the context of a legal proceeding, by which a person the subject of legal action may not see or hear evidence being used against them. This is contrary to fundamental characteristics of judicial process, including procedural fairness. This article discusses a recent High Court decision where growing dissatisfaction with the use of such procedures is evident, with three members finding such provisions unconstitutional. The article places these developments within the broader context of the development of Chapter III jurisprudence. The recent decision shows the Court in a phase where it seeks to more robustly apply the separation of powers reflected in Chapter III, with positive implications for liberty. It might also herald the eventual adoption of proportionality analysis in this context.

For the PDF version of the table of contents, click here: New Westlaw Australia – AJ Admin L Vol 31 No 2 Contents.

Click here to access on New Westlaw AU

For general queries, please contact: [email protected].