Search

Sessional academics are an important part of the provision of legal education in higher education with many institutions relying to a large extent on their sessional academics to deliver the teaching program, particularly in the first year. This is particularly relevant to Law Schools as many sessional academics are legal practitioners rather than HDR students. Therefore it is important for both the staff and student experience as well as to the attainment of the learning outcomes that consideration is given to the professional development and training of sessional academics. The QUT Law School has been a participant in a university pilot providing opportunities through the Sessional Academic Success program for academic development, support and developing a sense of belonging for sessional academics. This article will explain the program and initial outcomes and report on the results of surveys and focus groups of sessional academics as well as feedback from fulltime staff. The article will conclude with an analysis of the benefits to sessional academics, students and the School as a whole.

The use of technology for purposes such as communication and document management has become essential to legal practice with practitioners and courts increasingly relying on various forms of technology. Accordingly, legal practitioners need to be able to understand, communicate with, and persuade their audience using this technology. Technology skills are therefore an essential and integral part of undergraduate legal education, and given the widening participation agenda in Australia and consequent increasing diversity of law students, it must also be available to all students. To neglect this most crucial part of modern legal education is to fail in a fundamental aspect of a University’s obligation not just to its students, but ultimately to our students’ potential employers and their future clients. This paper will consider how law schools can facilitate the development of technology skills by using technology to facilitate mooting in settings that replicate legal practice. In order to assess the facilities at the disposal of universities, the authors surveyed the law schools in Australia about their equipment in and use of electronic moot court rooms. The authors also conducted and evaluated an internal mooting competition using Elluminate, an online communication platform available to students through Blackboard. Students were able to participate wherever they were located without the need to attend a moot court room. The results of the survey and evaluation of the Elluminate competition will be discussed. The paper will conclude that while it is essential to teach technology skills as part of legal education, it is important that the benefits and importance of using technology be made clear in order for it to be accepted and embraced by the students. Technology must also be available to all students considering the widening participation in higher education and consequent increasing diversity of law students.

Tort law reform has resulted in legislation being passed by all Australian jurisdictions in the past decade implementing the recommendations contained in the Ipp Report. The report was in response to a perceived crisis in medical indemnity insurance. The objective was to restrict and limit liability in negligence actions. This paper will consider to what extent the reforms have impacted on the liability of health professionals in medical negligence actions. The reversal of the onus of proof through the obvious risk sections has attempted to extend the scope of the defence of voluntary assumption of risk. There is no liability for the materialisation of an inherent risk. Presumptions and mandatory reductions for contributory negligence have attempted to reduce the liability of defendants. It is now possible for reductions of 100% for contributory negligence. Apologies can be made with no admission of legal liability to encourage them being made and thereby reduce the number of actions being commenced. The peer acceptance defence has been introduced and enacted by legislation. There is protection for good samaritans even though the Ipp Report recommended against such protection. Limitation periods have been amended. Provisions relating to mental harm have been introduced re-instating the requirement of normal fortitude and direct perception. After an analysis of the legislation, it will be argued in this paper that while there has been some limitation and restriction, courts have generally interpreted the civil liability reforms in compliance with the common law. It has been the impact of statutory limits on the assessment of damages which has limited the liability of health professionals in medical negligence actions.

In the context of government funding and targets for increased participation in higher education and equity groups, as well as attrition rates, the literature on first year higher education highlights the importance of appropriate levels of support for students transitioning to higher education. In the law school context, support of first year students is also important in the response to the high levels of stress among law students. It is therefore necessary for universities to provide a variety of support to first year students from both a student perspective and a curriculum perspective. This paper explores the process of investigating the expansion of student support, including peer support programs, staff led programs, appointing a first year coordinator and developing a curriculum plan. These programs promote engagement and ensure a cohesive and integrated first year experience from both curriculum design and student experience perspectives. This paper will explain the process undertaken at QUT of expanding support for first year law students, overview the program details and will reflect on the feedback from students, peer facilitators and staff of expanding support for first year law students at QUT. The paper will conclude with recommendations for improvement to the program.

In Wicks v State Rail Authority NSW; Sheehan v State Rail Authority NSW [2010] HCA 22 (16 June 2010) the duty of care owed to rescuers, who were police officers, at a train derailment, was considered in conjunction with the interpretation of the Civil Liability Act (NSW) 2002.

It is generally acknowledged that mooting is an effective way to enhance the teaching of practical skills in legal education as well as to provide an authentic learning experience with links to the real world. However, there are a number of impediments to students participating in mooting; in particular being located off-campus, inexperience and lack of time. It has been suggested that technology may be a means of overcoming these impediments. However the use of technology in mooting has not been tested. This paper will report on a trial of the use of Second Life and Elluminate and videoconferencing as platforms for the conduct of moots. The trials identified limitations in the use of technology for mooting in particularly in relation to the development of advocacy skills. The paper will conclude that these limitations can be overcome by careful consideration of the appropriate technology to be used depending on the context and the objectives to be achieved by the moot. It will also suggest that in order to provide an authentic use of online communication technology in a court setting, the best available technology should be used for the conduct of moot competitions.

In a recent case the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered the duty of care owed by ambulance and police officers, issues concerning breach and causation and the practical effect of the exclusion of the plaintiff's evidence.

In 2008, there were a number of areas in the criminal law in Queensland in which there was law reform activity. These include jury reform, accident and provocation.

While a range of benefits to students participating in mooting have been identified by the legal education literature, there are impediments to students participating in mooting that have been revealed by recent surveys of law students at QUT. These impediments include time, geographical location and a failure to perceive the benefits of mooting. This paper will explore the benefits of using technology to overcome these impediments, evaluate technological options to facilitate distance mooting, such as the use of Second Life, Elluminate and video conferencing, and will recommend a trial of these options.

In a recent case the High Court considered whether a restaurant review was defamatory.

The relationship between the law and public policy in criminal law is one of mutual influence. Some recent cases highlight the strain between the two. There has been debate about whether the defence of provocation should be changed or abolished as well as consideration of changes to self-defence. Over the years both defences have undergone change through interpretation in cases and through legislative amendments. Tasmania abolished the defence of provocation in 2003 and Victoria followed in 2005. Other Australian jurisdictions as well as New Zealand and the United Kingdom are considering or have made reforms. This has been to some degree in response to cases which have caused concern amongst the public as well as governments. These cases include instances where men have successfully used the defence of provocation after killing their former female partners as well as same sex relationship issues. Provocation and self-defence will be considered in this paper as case studies of the role public outrage plays in promoting law reform and change. The defences will be illustrative of how the tension between public expectations about justice and fairness and perceptions about the role of gender and culture on the one hand and the formal process of law reform to reflect societal evolution on the other hand are resolved. It will be seen that even where there has been public outcry and pressure the response has not been knee-jerk but rather to refer matters to law reform commissions for a considered response. However it does show that there is a lack of proactive review of cases and that public pressure compels issues being put on the agenda rather than academic and professional priority.