*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 100 Part 2) contains the following material:<\/p>\n
CURRENT ISSUES<\/a> \u2013 Editor: Justice Fran\u00e7ois Kunc <\/strong><\/p>\n CONVEYANCING AND PROPERTY \u2013 Editors: Robert Angyal SC and Brendan Edgeworth <\/strong><\/p>\n CRIME AND EVIDENCE \u2013 Editor: Justice Phillip Priest <\/strong><\/p>\n RECENT CASES \u2013 Editor: Ruth Higgins <\/strong><\/p>\n History of the Australian Law Journal: The 1920s: A New Voice for the Legal Profession<\/strong><\/em><\/a>\u00a0\u2013 <\/strong><\/em>Larissa Reid<\/p>\n This article traces the establishment and early development of the Australian Law Journal in the 1920s, situating its launch in 1927 within a profession seeking national identity after Federation. It examines the Journal\u2019s founding aims: to provide practical legal information, encourage the interchange of ideas across State boundaries, and offer legal rather than political criticism of cases and statutes. The article profiles key figures including inaugural editor Sir Bernard Sugerman, Law Book Company managing director HN Lambert, and the first State and section editors. It also explores the Journal\u2019s early voice, recurring columns, engagement with legal history, and role as a record of professional life. Through examples from its pages, the article reveals contemporary concerns including professional regulation, women in law, motor vehicle litigation, divorce, constitutional law, and Australia\u2019s continuing relationship with English precedent.<\/p>\n Climate Change: Government Responsibilities Under Australian Law<\/a> \u2013\u00a0<\/strong><\/em>John Basten<\/p>\n \u201c<\/strong>We\u2019re All In This Together<\/strong><\/em>\u201d: <\/strong><\/a>Civility and Institutional Trust<\/a> \u2013 <\/strong><\/em>Justice Peter Quinlan<\/p>\n Justice Peter Quinlan argues that judicial civility is essential not only for collegiality but for sustaining institutional trust in the judiciary. Personal attacks by judges on one another risk shifting public confidence from the court as an institution to the perceived virtues of individual judges, thereby weakening judicial legitimacy. Because trust in judges is necessarily institutional rather than personal, disagreement and appellate correction must be framed as part of the judiciary\u2019s self-correcting function, not as occasions for ridicule or moral superiority. Quinlan concludes that judges should communicate disagreement carefully, avoid language implying personal deficiency, and remain conscious that public confidence depends on the judiciary acting, and appearing, as a collective institution.<\/p>\n BOOK REVIEW \u2013 Editor: Angelina Gomez <\/strong><\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
Articles<\/h3>\n