*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 or contact us on 1300 304 195 (Australian customers) or +61 2 8587 7980 (international customers) during business hours (Mon-Fri, 8am-6pm AST).<\/p>\n
The latest issue of the Journal of Civil Litigation and Practice<\/em> (Volume 10 Part 3) contains the following material:<\/p>\n EDITORIAL<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c General Editors: Roderick Joyce QSO QC and Professor Michael Legg<\/em><\/p>\n Click here to access on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n The Element of Good Faith as a Framework for Ethical Practice in Court-connected Mediation<\/strong><\/em><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Dr John Woodward<\/p>\n The growth of mediation as a dispute resolution process when conducted in the shadow of the law has witnessed an increase in calls for the development of a code of ethics for guidance of the legal profession in mediation practice. This article identifies the source of ethical requirements for lawyers practicing mediation in Australia and considers the notion of \u00e2\u20ac\u0153good faith\u00e2\u20ac\u009d as a basis upon which to formulate a framework for ethical practice by lawyers in court-connected mediation.<\/p>\n Click here to access article on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n A Final Resolution to the Question of Leave to Appeal from Costs Orders in the Federal Court<\/strong><\/em><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Brandon Smith and Andrew Ray<\/p>\n Given recent and divergent court decisions, whether a party requires leave to appeal from a final costs order in the Federal Court of Australia remains unclear. On one view, such orders are interlocutory in nature, with leave to appeal required by the operation of s 24(1A) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 <\/em>(Cth). On the other, however, costs orders made at the final disposition of the proceeding (or which finally determine any outstanding costs issues in dispute) may fall outside traditional conceptions of \u00e2\u20ac\u0153interlocutory orders\u00e2\u20ac\u009d. If correct, the latter view would expose parties (and the Court) to significant and protracted delays where parties would be able to delay the finalisation of (and possibly fragment) proceedings by appealing costs orders to the Full Court. This article analyses the current treatment of costs orders in the Federal Court, with regard to historic jurisprudence concerning the definitions of interlocutory and final orders. It argues that leave to appeal from costs orders should be necessary and legislative amendment is required to put the issue beyond dispute.<\/p>\n Click here to access article on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n CASE NOTE<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editors: Roderick Joyce QSO QC, Professor Michael Legg and William Fotherby<\/em><\/p>\n Click here to access on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n COURT WATCH<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Bernard Cairns <\/em><\/p>\n Click here to access on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n For the PDF version of the table of contents, click here: Westlaw AU \u00e2\u20ac\u201c JCivLP Vol 10 No 3 Contents<\/a> or here: New Westlaw Australia \u00e2\u20ac\u201c JCivLP Vol 10 No 3 Contents<\/a>.<\/p>\n Click here to access this Part on Westlaw AU<\/a><\/p>\n Click here to access this Part on New Westlaw AU<\/a><\/p>\n\n
Articles<\/h3>\n
\n
\n