{"id":5365,"date":"2013-07-24T14:19:48","date_gmt":"2013-07-24T04:19:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/?p=5365"},"modified":"2013-07-24T14:19:48","modified_gmt":"2013-07-24T04:19:48","slug":"australian-law-journal-update-july-2013","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.thomsonreuters.com.au\/journals\/2013\/07\/24\/australian-law-journal-update-july-2013\/","title":{"rendered":"Australian Law Journal update: July 2013"},"content":{"rendered":"

*Please note that the links to the content in this Part will direct you to Westlaw AU. If you are still using Legal Online, the links can be found in the LOLA PDF<\/strong> at the bottom of this post.<\/p>\n

The latest issue of the\u00c2\u00a0Australian Law Journal<\/em> (Volume\u00c2\u00a087 Part 7) contains the following material:<\/p>\n

Articles<\/h3>\n

The judicial herd: Seduced by suave glittering phrases?<\/i><\/b><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Hon Peter Heerey AM QC<\/p>\n

Should appellate judges confer between themselves about cases they are hearing? Should they circulate draft judgments? Should each judge give a separate judgment? In an article in the Law Quarterly Review, former High Court justice, the Honourable Dyson Heydon AC QC expresses views on these topics which the present author disputes.<\/p>\n

To purchase this article, complete the Individual Article Sale<\/a> order form and email it to tlranz.journal.orders@thomsonreuters.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Company directors as \u00e2\u20ac\u0153super-fiduciaries\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/i><\/b><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Michael Pearce SC<\/p>\n

This article traces the development of the law of directors\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 duties, from its early formulations by the judges of the Court of Chancery, through its successive statutory formulations to the present provisions of the Corporations Act. It considers how, in a series of recent decisions, the courts have used s 180(1) of the Corporations Act to impose liability on company directors for the wrongs of their companies in circumstances where the director has done no more than cause or permit the company to break the law irrespective of any dishonesty or conflict of interest of the director.<\/p>\n

To purchase this article, complete the Individual Article Sale<\/a> order form and email it to tlranz.journal.orders@thomsonreuters.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The categories of waiver<\/i><\/b><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Jeremy Stoljar<\/p>\n

The term \u00e2\u20ac\u0153waiver\u00e2\u20ac\u009d is often used in legal discourse. Generally it denotes an abandonment or extinguishment of a right of some kind. How and why the abandonment is effected, and its legal consequences, depend on the particular circumstances of the case and the principles responsive to those circumstances as developed in the authorities. In this article 11 different categories of waiver are identified and discussed. Each category is different, each engages different legal principles. There is no overarching independent doctrine of waiver which unifies and explains every use of the term.<\/p>\n

To purchase this article, complete the Individual Article Sale<\/a> order form and email it to tlranz.journal.orders@thomsonreuters.com<\/a>.<\/b><\/p>\n

Sections<\/h3>\n

CURRENT ISSUES<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Acting Justice Peter W Young AO<\/b><\/p>\n