Search

Australia’s combustible cladding crisis is estimated to cost approximately $6 billion to remediate. No study has been published which determined the causative factors for the magnitude of this issue. Investigators for the Federal Building Ministers’ Forum stated that building practitioners misinterpreted or ignored the requirements of the National Construction Code. However, research by the authors showed that the cause of Australia’s combustible cladding crisis are likely deficiencies in the National Construction Code itself. A comparative analysis of historic National Construction Code requirements and recent National Construction Code changes in response to cladding fires showed that the factors which contributed to Australia’s combustible cladding crisis were present for nearly 20 years. Findings also showed that some of the newly introduced measures incorporated in the National Construction Code to address the combustible cladding crisis do not fully address combustible cladding risks and fail to completely address the historical deficiencies.

The article in the magazine "Environmental Legal News" presents the ruling of the Supreme Court on October 2, 2024, in which it rules on an administrative litigation related to hydrological plans in the Guadalquivir demarcation. The appeal focuses on the transfer from the El Portillo dam to the municipality of Baza and the overexploitation of the aquifers in the Sierra de Baza. The Court concludes that the works are in accordance with the legal system and dismisses the appeal filed. [Extracted from the article]

Delegated legislation involves Parliament lending its legislative powers to the executive branch of government, such as to the cabinet or an individual minister. As the ultimate source of legislative power, Parliament has a special responsibility to keep an eye on executive lawmaking. The Australian federal scrutiny committee – formerly called the Senate Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances, and now rebadged as the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation – recently carried out an inquiry to consider how it could improve its scrutiny process. In 2019 it published a unanimous report that was endorsed by the Australian Senate in November when it amended its Standing Orders in line with the committee’s proposed changes. This article provides an overview of the Australian scrutiny committee and its inquiry. It then considers the committee’s report and recommendations, which present an opportunity to consider changes to the parliamentary scrutiny of delegated legislation in other jurisdictions such as Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lawmakers and scholars concerned with content moderation regulation typically appeal to "analogies" to justify or undermine different forms of regulation. The logic goes: law should afford individuals due process rights against speech platforms because speech platforms are "like" speech governors as a matter of objective reality. Other common analogies include common carriers, publishers, distributors, shopping malls, and bookstores. Commentators attempt to invoke social roles to understand what the content moderation relationship is, what behaviors are "right" and "wrong" within it, and how law should police behavioral deviations. But they do so without relying on foundational sociology theory that explains what social roles are, what they do, and how they come to be. Without this theoretical foundation, the discourse incompletely portrays the project of content moderation regulation. Content moderation regulations do not simply "take" speech platforms' role as it currently exists----they will also "make" speech platforms' role by expressing that speech platforms should be speech governors, common carriers, publishers, or something else, based on how lawmakers choose to regulate. This Article is the first to introduce role theory into the content moderation discourse. Content moderation regulations are poised to define the basic contours of what it means to be a "speech platform" because the role remains unsettled. Earlier, the Communications Decency Act failed to articulate coherent roles within the content moderation relationship. But current content moderation regulatory reforms--including the PACT Act in Congress as well as state platform-common carriage laws and their judicial review--have a renewed opportunity to script social roles for speech platforms and individuals. Foregrounding these reforms' role scripts directs attention to urgent questions about whether they are likely to produce a desirable content moderation relationship and an online speech ecosystem that meets the public's needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite empirical evidence documenting its harms and substantial legislative efforts to ban its practice, conversion therapy remains a tragically prevalent practice in the United States. Recently, a circuit split between the Ninth and Eleventh Circuits has developed, raising questions about the future of conversion therapy regulation. This Note takes a retrospective look at the last ten years of conversion therapy bans and related legal challenges, questions the effectiveness of enacted bans, and explores routes for more effective regulation. This Note ultimately argues that conversion therapy bans must shift their focus to the regulation of unlicensed practitioners in order to better protect minors from the empirically demonstrated harms of conversion therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction to The Problem: Delegated legislation in Indonesia is a new type of legislation that should be interpreted and ruled carefully. However, nowadays, the Indonesian legal system has no fixed term for delegated legislation and no hierarchy on it. Furthermore, as many as 57.677 regulations at the level of Ministries, Agencies and State Institutions have the potential to overlap regulations and become subject to judicial review in the Supreme Court Purpose/Objective Study: This article aims to analyze the best term and hierarchy of delegated legislation in the legal system in Indonesia. Design/Methodology/Approach: This legal research conducted normative studies, by examining previous studies on delegated legislation and Electronic and Information Transaction (EIT) law to imagine the delegated legislation type and hierarchy. The data was analyzed by a prescriptive method to give a new idea regarding delegated legislation in Indonesia's legal system. Findings: This paper finds no fixed term for delegated legislation in the Indonesian legal system. There is a loophole in the Indonesian legal system related to delegated legislation. However, some scholars argue that delegated legislation in Indonesia can be found in Government Regulation, Presidential Regulation, Local Regulation and beleidsregel in Article 8 Paragraph (1) Law Number 12 of 2011 concerning Establishing Statutory Regulation and its amendment. As a suggestion, the amendment of the Law on Establishing Statutory Regulation is a must in carrying delegated legislation definition, purpose and hierarchy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Australia's combustible cladding crisis is estimated to cost approximately $6 billion to remediate. No study has been published which determined the causative factors for the magnitude of this issue. Investigators for the Federal Building Ministers' Forum stated that building practitioners misinterpreted or ignored the requirements of the National Construction Code. However, research by the authors showed that the cause of Australia's combustible cladding crisis are likely deficiencies in the National Construction Code itself. A comparative analysis of historic National Construction Code requirements and recent National Construction Code changes in response to cladding fires showed that the factors which contributed to Australia's combustible cladding crisis were present for nearly 20 years. Findings also showed that some of the newly introduced measures incorporated in the National Construction Code to address the combustible cladding crisis do not fully address combustible cladding risks and fail to completely address the historical deficiencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Originalist proponents of a tougher nondelegation doctrine confront the many broad delegations that Congress enacted in the 1790s by claiming that each fell into some exceptional category to which the original nondelegation doctrine was inapplicable or weakly applicable, one being foreign affairs. There is lively debate on whether the founding generation actually recognized an exception to nondelegation principles for foreign affairs. This Article, commissioned for a symposium on “The Statutory Foreign Affairs Presidency,” intervenes in the debate by examining the Embargo Authorization Act of 1794, which empowered the President to lay an embargo on all ships in U.S. ports (and/or other classes of ships) if “the public safety shall so require,” for the upcoming five-month congressional recess. This was a delegation of remarkable power over the U.S. economy, which at the time depended heavily on maritime transport. An examination of the Act undermines the idea that there existed a foreign-affairs exception to cover it. Originalist proponents of a tougher nondelegation doctrine claim the doctrine was meant to protect private individual rights of liberty and property, yet Americans in the late 1700s lived in an economy that was more dependent on foreign commerce than it has ever been since, in which a five-month international embargo could be disastrous for private business nationwide. In this context, an “exception” for foreign affairs would be strange, turning economic reality on its head. Furthermore, the Act itself flouted any objective or even workable distinction between the foreign and the domestic. The Act’s unqualified use of the term “embargo” authorized the President to prohibit the departure of all ships, not only those sailing to foreign ports but also to other U.S. ports in the coastwise trade, which was then the main channel of U.S. domestic commerce. And even if the President were to impose an embargo aimed mainly at international maritime trade, preventing evasion of such a restriction required regulation of the coastwise trade—regulation that contemporaries apparently understood the Act to authorize. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]