In 1847, in one of the most important cases in Australian legal history, the Chief Justice of NSW, Sir Alfred Stephen, handed down a decision that would have profound implications for both the development of Australian property law and the property rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Australia. The case was Attorney General v Brown, and in his decision Stephen CJ ruled that the laws of property in Australia were governed by feudal principles. The shadow cast by Attorney General v Brown has been a long one, stretching down to the decision in Mabo and beyond. Judicial thinking and much legal scholarship continues to emphasise a connection between the feudal origins of the English law and the state of contemporary Australian property law, thereby perpetuating a "nostalgic" view of Australian property law. This book, in contrast, argues that the feudal imprint on property in Australia had been "washed away" by the early 1860s and that the decades of the early nineteenth century witnessed the making of a distinct Australian property law. Egalitarianism, rather than feudalism, this book argues, shaped the emergence of Australian property law. This book situates legal development in its social and political context, re-evaluating the relationship between political ideas, social values and law reform in early Australia.

Textbook

This comprehensive book provides a clear explanation of the operative rules of evidence in all Australian jurisdictions by reference to their underlying and unifying evidential principles, providing the necessary framework to understand and address evidential issues. The common law evolved an adversarial process with the aim of rational and accurate proof of facts, reflecting a liberal notion of justice whereby parties initiate and pursue proceedings before independent judges and jurors. In criminal trials this process demands that the state establish its accusations beyond reasonable doubt without assistance from the accused. The authors explain how this process provides the fundamental rationale for evidential rules both at common law and under the uniform evidence legislation (UEL), and identify where evidential rules protect values extraneous to this process. Significant developments covered in the sixth edition include: Consideration by the HCA of common law doctrine: residual 'fairness' discretion questioned (Dupas v R (2013)); privilege against incrimination of spouses rejected (ACC v Stoddart (2011)); use of evidence obtained in compulsory examination of the accused rejected (X7 v ACC (2013); Lee v R (2014)); expression of statistical evidence not restricted (Aytugrul v R (2012)) Adoption of the UEL in the ACT and the NT UEL and WA amendments privileging confidential professional communications and disclosure of journalists' sources HCA decisions on the interpretation of the UEL: 'probative value' does not concern credibility and reliability (IMM v R (2016)); no distinction between reliability of sworn and unsworn testimony (R v GW (2016)); no reliability standard for admission of 'specialised knowledge' opinions (Honeysett v R (2014); Dasreef v R (2013)) State legislation including the Jury Directions Act 2015 (Vic), and amendments to the Evidence Act 1929 (SA) The new edition is an authoritative and principled source for those practising or studying Australian evidence law. Features Explains evidence rules in the context of the adversarial process Includes comparative position under Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and common law evidence rules Identifies underlying principles of evidence to enable navigation of complex rules Related Titles Field, Queensland Evidence Law, 4th edition, 2017Field & Offer, Western Australian Evidence Law, 2015Heydon, Cross on Evidence, 10th edition, 2015Williams, Anderson, Marychurch & Roy, Uniform Evidence in Australia, 2015

In the relation of states, treaties are a matter of great importance. The law of treaties and the study of treaty-making procedures in municipal law systems have become both from a theoretical and practical point of view, subjects of increasing interest. The United Nations Legal Committee as well as the International Law Commission have published studies concerned with the relationship of international law and municipal law, emphasizing national practices concerning the conclusion of treaties. In the case of some countries, such as Great Britain and the United States, numerous studies of treaty making problems have been made, but much less has been published in the case of many other countries such as Australia, Canada or India. In the case of Australia, research on treaty-making has resulted in comparatively few published articles in scholarly and legal journals and only a few comments in general legal treatises. But no comprehen sive legal analysis of the subject has as yet appeared. This study aims to present a comprehensive survey and analysis of actual treaty making procedures and practices in Australia against the setting of the relevant constitutional and other legal norms of the Australian political system. The analysis of treaty-making will consider both normative and empirical legal aspects. Basic constitutional norms, legal principles derived from common and constitutional law and statutes will be discussed, as well as the actual practices and procedures used in the exercise of the treaty-making power.

Making it National argues that we need to rethink the way national identity is constructed in Australia today. Graeme Turner takes a series of recent instances - the mythologising of Bond and the larrikin entrepreneurs, the Spycatcher trials, Maralinga and the Bicentenary - showing how popular images of national identity are used to serve specific rather than national interests. 'Graeme Turner's writing has a remarkable power to engage its readers with all the immediacy, vividness and drama of our very best journalism, while putting cultural theory to work in new and creative ways.' - Meaghan Morris 'Making it National could be to the 1990s what Richard White's Inventing Australia was to the 1980s.' - Tony Bennett, Institute for Cultural Policy Studies, Griffith University