*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 AEST).<\/p>\n
The latest issue of the Australian Law Journal (Volume 99 Part 10) contains the following material:<\/p>\n
CURRENT ISSUES<\/a> \u2013 Editor: Justice Fran\u00e7ois Kunc<\/strong><\/p>\n CONVEYANCING \u2013 Editors: Robert Angyal SC and Brendan Edgeworth<\/strong><\/p>\n EQUITY AND TRUSTS \u2013 Editor: Aryan Mohseni<\/strong><\/p>\n STATUTORY INTERPRETATION \u2013 Editor: John Basten KC<\/strong><\/p>\n THE LEGAL OBSERVER \u2013 Editor: Michael Pelly<\/strong><\/p>\n Civility <\/strong><\/em><\/a>\u2013 MG Hinton KC<\/p>\n In 2024, the South Australian Equal Opportunity Commissioner conducted a follow-upreview of a 2021 Report into harassment in the South Australian Legal Profession. Where the 2021 Report considered that bullying was as prevalent as sexual and discriminatory harassment, the 2024 Report found that two in every five respondents to the review had experienced bullying in the three years since 2021. One in five respondents said their bully was a judicial officer. One of the drivers facilitating bullying was identified by the Commissioner as incivility. In this article the author analyses what civility is and the centrality of civility to the practise of law and the administration of justice, hypothesising that addressing the more easily recognisable incivility will go a considerable way to addressing bullying.<\/p>\n The Proper Purpose Rule: Preventing Law\u2019s Intentional Abuse <\/strong><\/em><\/a>\u2013 Dr Jessica Hudson<\/p>\n This article examines the equitable doctrine of fraud on a power, increasingly referred to as the proper purpose rule. The rule performs a basic rule of law commitment to prevent law\u2019s abuse. Yet, there is much about it that is uncertain, such as whether the rule operates on purpose or motive; imposes an objective or subjective standard; has the effect of voidness or voidability; and its relationship with other rules such as good faith and fiduciary loyalty. This article aims to resolve some of these uncertainties by examining the rule across private and public powerholding arrangements. This broader perspective shows the rule is a consistent response to the same basic problem arising throughout a legal system: the intentional abuse of legal power. Also, apparent inconsistencies and uncertainties can be made sense of according to the specific context, the type of power and way in which power is devolved.<\/p>\n BOOK REVIEW \u2013 Editor: Angelina Gomez<\/strong><\/p>\n PERSONALIA<\/a> \u2013 Editor: Saskia O\u2019Neill<\/strong><\/p>\n For the PDF version of the table of contents, click here: New Westlaw Australia – ALJ Vol 99 No 10 Contents<\/a><\/p>\n Click here to access this Part on New Westlaw AU<\/a><\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Articles<\/h3>\n
\n
\n