Sylvester on 'eLearn – Statutory Interpretation – an Introduction'

Ms Lisa Sylvester of the USQ School of Law and Justice has recently published eLearn - Statutory Interpretation - an Introduction along with co-author Sharon Szeto.  

This interactive digital learning

resource is available on the LexisNexis online store.  Here is the publisher's summary:

"eLearn: Statutory Interpretation – an Introduction is an online resource that provides students of law and related disciplines with an interactive way to know, understand and practise the fundamentals of interpretation.

This digital resource provides activities that create an engaging way to improve the skills and knowledge that students acquire in their seminars and tutorials. It is designed to align with a semester course where statutory interpretation may be either a unit of study or embedded in another legal subject. It highlights the modern approach to statutory interpretation.

The resource serves as a revision and support tool. Students can stop an activity, logoff and resume at the point they last reached. Completing the reading and activities will take students 5–7 hours, depending on their level of interest and interaction with extra content such as flowcharts; how-to videos and glossaries. It is a companion resource for all foundations of law textbooks and units in which statutory interpretation is taught.

Features

• Interactive timeline to understand England’s role in the development of Australia’s parliament
• Videos to support the practice of research skills
• Search activities that link to Federal Register of Legislation (also NSW and Victoria)
• A “hinty-bot” to provide tips on the learning journey
• Resource tab that includes useful links; downloadable documents; and a glossary of legal terms
• End of module quizzes"

Hemming on ‘Is there any prospect of a model provision for similar fact/propensity evidence or the coincidence/tendency rules in Australia?’

Dr Andrew Hemming, a Senior Lecturer in the USQ School of Law and Justice, has published a new article titled ‘Is there any prospect of a model provision for similar fact/propensity evidence or the coincidence/tendency rules in Australia?’ The article appears in Volume 44 of the Criminal Law Journal.  Here is the abstract:

"Australia has five tests for the admission of similar fact or propensity evidence as it is known at common law, or alternatively coincidence or tendency evidence as it is known under the Uniform Evidence Legislation. Each test differs according to the difficulty or “bar” the Crown faces in obtaining the court’s permission to adduce such potentially damaging evidence. This article will weigh the merits of each of the five tests in an endeavour to establish whether there is any prospect of a model provision, such that a uniform test across Australian criminal law jurisdictions for the admission of similar fact or tendency evidence could be adopted, aside from child sexual offences and domestic violence offences. It is acknowledged that where to set the bar of
admission is both a moral and political one, weighing the moral harm of wrongful conviction against the public interest in convicting offenders (leaving aside local factors such as whether jury trials are mandatory or whether joint trials are common). The criteria for determining the test for a model provision will be considered in Part III, which if adopted will require a shift in the weight ascribed to these competing considerations in some jurisdictions."

Gray on ‘The Evolution from Strict Liability to Negligence: Implications for the Tort of Private Nuisance Part II’

Professor Anthony Gray of the USQ School of Law and Justice has published a new article titled 'The Evolution from Strict Liability to Negligence: Implications for the Tort of Private Nuisance Part II'.  The article appears in Volume 94(9) of the Australian Law Journal.  Here is the abstract:

"Part 1 of this article considered the broad shift in the law of tort away from a strict liability, “act at peril” approach in favour of a fault-based system of liability, best shown in the explosive growth of the tort of negligence. Given the overwhelming prevalence of fault-based liability in negligence, it causes us to wonder about continuing pockets of strict liability elsewhere in tort law. The tort of private nuisance is typically seen as one such tort. Part 2 considers these trends and developments, with a view to considering whether the tort of private nuisance might now be subsumed into the law of negligence, as has occurred with other torts that formerly had a separate identity."