Please note that the links to the content in this Part will direct you to Westlaw AU.<\/p>\n
To purchase an article, please email: LTA.Service@thomsonreuters.com\u00c2\u00a0or\u00c2\u00a0contact us on 1300 304 195\u00c2\u00a0(Australian customers) or +61 2 8587 7980\u00c2\u00a0(international customers) during business hours\u00c2\u00a0(Mon-Fri, 8am-6pm AEST).<\/p>\n
The latest issue of the\u00c2\u00a0Australian Law Journal<\/em> (Volume 93 Part 5) contains the following material:<\/p>\n CURRENT ISSUES<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Justice Fran\u00c3\u00a7ois Kunc<\/strong><\/p>\n CONVEYANCING AND PROPERTY<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editors: Robert Angyal SC and Brendan Edgeworth<\/strong><\/p>\n ENVIRONMENTAL LAW<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Justice Rachel Pepper<\/strong><\/p>\n CORPORATIONS AND SECURITIES<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Jason Harris<\/strong><\/p>\n STATUTORY INTERPRETATION<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: The Hon John Basten<\/strong><\/p>\n AROUND THE NATION: AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Justice David Mossop<\/strong><\/p>\n AROUND THE NATION: NORTHERN TERRITORY<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Hon Dean Mildren AM RFD QC<\/strong><\/p>\n Courts as (Living) Institutions and Workplaces<\/strong><\/em><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c\u00c2\u00a0<\/strong>Chief Justice James Allsop<\/p>\n Law Reform \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Future Directions<\/strong><\/em><\/a>\u00c2\u00a0\u00e2\u20ac\u201c\u00c2\u00a0The Hon Justice S C Derrington<\/p>\n Law Schools and The Burden Of Bureaucracy: Release The Yoke (A Plea From The Coalface). Part 1: Over-Regulation in Australia<\/strong><\/em><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c\u00c2\u00a0Olivia Rundle and Lynden Griggs<\/p>\n Compliance work is stifling the capacity of Australian law schools and legal academics to engage in the core activities of research and teaching. There are multiple bodies who accredit, monitor and\/or impose reporting requirements upon legal educators, and the legal profession is involved in more than one of these regulatory systems. In this two-part article, we make a plea from the coalface of academia, that the burden of regulation, certification, and accreditation of law schools and law teaching be lightened. In the first part, which is this article, we overview the legal profession\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s role in legal education, the current and proposed Law Admissions Consultative Committee (LACC) regulatory systems, and critique the LACC Standards. In Part 2, (a future article), we draw from international experiences to compare with the Australian regulatory regime and make a proposal for change.<\/p>\n The Animal as a Chattel? Conferring Equitable Rights on Nonhuman Animals<\/strong><\/em><\/a>\u00c2\u00a0\u00e2\u20ac\u201c\u00c2\u00a0Scott Wotherspoon<\/p>\n Describing the Re Dean line of authorities as private purpose trusts misconceives the interests that animals themselves have under trusts established for their benefit. The animal trust cases should be quarantined from the category of anomalous purpose trusts. They should be regarded as examples of a sui generis trust, in which particular animals are themselves beneficiaries, with equitable rights exigible against the trustee and the trust fund. Considered in this light, there is little to distinguish an animal trust from a trust established for a severely disabled person or an unborn child. Deploying the language of the \u00e2\u20ac\u0153purpose\u00e2\u20ac\u009d trust in this context is a needless diversion and will stultify the development of this important branch of trust law.<\/p>\n BOOK REVIEW<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Angelina Gomez<\/strong><\/p>\n For the PDF\u00c2\u00a0version of the table of contents, click here: ALJ Vol 93 No 5 Contents<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Articles<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n