We are proudly a Ukrainian website. Our country was attacked by Russian Armed Forces on Feb. 24, 2022.
You can support the Ukrainian Army by following the link: https://u24.gov.ua/.
Even the smallest donation is hugely appreciated!
Geben Sie eine Quelle nach APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard und anderen Zitierweisen an
Machen Sie sich mit den Listen der aktuellen Artikel, Bücher, Dissertationen, Berichten und anderer wissenschaftlichen Quellen zum Thema "Liability (Law) Australia" bekannt.
Neben jedem Werk im Literaturverzeichnis ist die Option "Zur Bibliographie hinzufügen" verfügbar. Nutzen Sie sie, wird Ihre bibliographische Angabe des gewählten Werkes nach der nötigen Zitierweise (APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver usw.) automatisch gestaltet.
Sie können auch den vollen Text der wissenschaftlichen Publikation im PDF-Format herunterladen und eine Online-Annotation der Arbeit lesen, wenn die relevanten Parameter in den Metadaten verfügbar sind.
Zeitschriftenartikel zum Thema "Liability (Law) Australia":
1
Giliker, Paula. „ANALYSING INSTITUTIONAL LIABILITY FOR CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE IN ENGLAND AND WALES AND AUSTRALIA: VICARIOUS LIABILITY, NON-DELEGABLE DUTIES AND STATUTORY INTERVENTION“. Cambridge Law Journal 77, Nr. 3 (24.09.2018): 506–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197318000685.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
Annotation:
AbstractThis paper will argue that, in the light of recent case law in the UK and Australia, a new approach is needed when dealing with claims for vicarious liability and non-delegable duties in the law of tort. It will submit that lessons can be learnt from a comparative study of these jurisdictions, notably by reflecting on the courts’ treatment of claims of institutional liability for child sexual abuse. In parallel to decisions of their highest courts, public enquiries in Australia and England and Wales, established to report on historic child sexual abuse and how to engage in best practice, are now reporting their findings which include proposals for victim reparation: see Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (Australia, 2017) including its Redress and Civil Litigation Report (2015); Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (Interim report, England and Wales, 2018). The Australian reports suggest reforms not only to state practice, but also to private law. This article will critically examine the operation of vicarious liability and non-delegable duties in England and Wales and Australia and proposals for statutory intervention. It will submit that a more cautious incremental approach is needed to control the ever-expanding doctrine of vicarious liability in UK law and to develop more fully its more restrictive Australian counterpart.
2
McBride, Nicholas J. „VICARIOUS LIABILITY IN ENGLAND AND AUSTRALIA“. Cambridge Law Journal 62, Nr. 2 (01.07.2003): 255–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197303266307.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
3
Rajapakse, Pelma Jacinth. „Contamination of Food and Drinks: Product Liability in Australia“. Deakin Law Review 21, Nr. 1 (23.02.2018): 45. http://dx.doi.org/10.21153/dlr2016vol21no1art718.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
Annotation:
This article examines the Australian law determining liability of manufacturers and retailers for injury or death allegedly caused by food and drink products which were spoiled, contaminated, or otherwise in a deleterious condition. Product liability and the issue of negligence associated with consumption of foods or drinks deemed as contaminated form the key points of discussion in this article. The liability of manufacturers, processors, wholesalers and retailers are explored with reference to elements of negligence, breach of express or implied warranty, misrepresentation, and strict liability in tort. Australian case law as it pertains to duty of care, breach, causation, and damage has been established and there are consumer protection and product safety laws at both state and federal levels that provide for those affected by contamination/harmful condition of food and drink products. This article explores examples of negligence as the basis of manufacturer’s, processor’s and retailer’s liability in tort (common law and Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld)) as well as liability under the federal and state legislation such as the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), the Food Act 2006 (Qld) and the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code). The various defences of contributory negligence of consumers, and obvious risk of injury suffered, as well as those established by manufacturers/retailers in the relevant proceedings are used to show the complexity of this issue. The article concludes with recommendations for consumers and businesses to avoid the risk of food contamination and to maintain food safety.
4
Krebs, Beatrice. „ACCESSORY LIABILITY: PERSISTING IN ERROR“. Cambridge Law Journal 76, Nr. 01 (März 2017): 7–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197317000150.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
Annotation:
IN Miller v The Queen [2016] HCA 30, the High Court of Australia (HCA) declined to follow the Privy Council and UK Supreme Court (UKSC) in abolishing the doctrine of extended joint criminal enterprise, as PAL is known in South Australia. Under the Australian doctrine, liability for murder is imposed where an individual “is a party to an agreement to commit a crime and foresees that death or really serious bodily injury might be occasioned by a co-venturer acting with murderous intention and he or she, with that awareness, continues to participate in the agreed criminal enterprise” (at [1]). This reflects the very position that was abandoned in Jogee [2016] UKSC 8; [2016] 2 W.L.R. 681 Ruddock v The Queen UKPC 7 as a “wrong turn” of the English common law.
5
Harland, David. „Reform of the law of product liability in Australia“. Journal of Consumer Policy 15, Nr. 2 (Juni 1992): 191–206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf01352136.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
6
Overland, Juliette. „Liability for insider trading: learning lessons from Australia“. International Journal of Private Law 2, Nr. 1 (2009): 62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/ijpl.2009.021513.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
7
McIvor, Claire. „Liability in Respect of the Intoxicated“. Cambridge Law Journal 60, Nr. 1 (März 2001): 109–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197301000642.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
Annotation:
THIS article considers how third parties may be held personally liable for harm inflicted by, and upon, the intoxicated. It charts the development of ‘alcohol liability’ in Canada and Australia and then goes on to demonstrate how this novel category of liability for the acts of others is beginning to work its way into the English law of tort.
8
Abu-Zeitoun, Mamoun, und Mouaid Al-Qudah. „Withdrawal and Criminal Liability under the Criminal Laws of Jordan and Australia: A Comparative Study“. Arab Law Quarterly 24, Nr. 1 (2010): 3–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157302510x12607945807197.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
Annotation:
This article is a comparative study of withdrawal as a defence to the criminal liability of an offender in Jordan (a civil law jurisdiction) and Australia (a common law jurisdiction). The analysis in this paper reveals that, in both jurisdictions, criminal laws have long accepted withdrawal as a conduit through which the offender’s liability can be modified or completely quashed. However, there has been no serious attempt, at least in Jordan, to provide anything approaching a complete explanation of the conditions under which the defence may be available and to explore its limits and boundaries. Neither has any serious effort been made to offer an account of the defence’s conceptual nature and governing rationale. The present paper seeks to identify and explore the defence’s conceptual basis and rationale, its current state of law and the appropriate direction in which the defence might be developed. To achieve this purpose, the paper is divided into three sections. In Section 1, it explores the conceptual nature of withdrawal. Section 2 addresses the rationale of the defence in light of the underlying principles of criminal liability in both jurisdictions. In Section 3 a comparative analysis of the defence’s qualifying requirements is undertaken in relation to both primary and accessorial criminal liability. Comparative analysis shows that withdrawal can be used as a defence to all forms of criminal complicity with differing degrees of variations in relation to both its qualifying requirements and the extent to which it may affect the liability of an offender. In cases involving incitement, however, the inciter cannot rely on the defence to avoid criminal liability although his or her punishment can be reduced pursuant to his or her voluntary withdrawal under the JPC.
9
Anderson, Helen. „Parent company liability for asbestos claims: some international insights“. Legal Studies 31, Nr. 4 (Dezember 2011): 547–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121x.2011.00202.x.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
Annotation:
Throughout the world, the corporate group structure has long proved troublesome to the creditors, and particularly the tort creditors, of undercapitalised subsidiary companies. In the wake of Australia's James Hardie asbestos compensation inquiry, Senior Counsel assisting the Jackson Special Commission, Mr John Sheahan QC, called for the Commission to ‘recommend reform of the Corporations Act so as to restrict the application of the limited liability principle as regards liability for damages for personal injury or death caused by a company that is part of a corporate group...’. Following this call, in May 2008 the Corporations and Markets Advisory Committee released a report on long-tail liabilities, making various recommendations for reform. Separately, legislation was passed making pooling available for insolvent group companies in Australia. This paper examines the long-tail liability suggestions and the 2007 pooling amendments. It will be argued that neither of these is adequate for the proper protection of tort creditors of insolvent subsidiaries. It then considers international alternatives which might satisfy Mr Sheahan's appeal for reform.
10
Ryan, Desmond. „FROM OPPORTUNITY TO OCCASION: VICARIOUS LIABILITY IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA“. Cambridge Law Journal 76, Nr. 01 (März 2017): 14–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197317000174.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
Annotation:
IN Prince Alfred College Incorporated v ADC [2016] HCA 37, the High Court of Australia (HCA) has once again considered the appropriate test for establishing vicarious liability of employers for the wrongful acts of their employees. The decision will be of interest to tort lawyers in the common-law world for at least four reasons. First, the Court looked afresh at the test for vicarious liability in the context of intentional wrongdoing and has accordingly clarified the confusion arising from its earlier decision in New South Wales v Lepore [2003] HCA 4; (2003) 212 C.L.R. 511. Secondly, the Court expressed very strong disagreement with the decision of the UK Supreme Court handed down just months earlier in Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc [2016] UKSC 11; [2016] A.C. 677. The Court apparently regarded Mohamud as having in effect abandoned the Lister qualification that mere opportunity was not enough to satisfy the close connection test (Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd. [2001] UKHL 22; [2002] 1 A.C. 215). Thirdly, the Court appears to have interpreted the relevant English authorities as espousing a Caparo-like criterion of fairness and justice as a separate stage of the close connection test (Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 A.C. 605). That interpretation is questionable. Finally, the Court has articulated a new test in Australian law for vicarious liability reasoning based on whether the employment provided the “occasion” for the wrongdoing to be committed. This prompts a reflection on the difference between “occasion” and “opportunity”, and how this new test is to be applied in practice.
Dissertationen zum Thema "Liability (Law) Australia":
1
Golding, Greg. „The reform of misstatement liability in Australia's laws“. Connect to full text, 2001. http://setis.library.usyd.edu.au/adt/public_html/adt-NU/public/adt-NU20040206.161344/index.html.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
2
Higgs, Robin JED Law Faculty of Law UNSW. „Implantable surgical devices issues of product liability“. Awarded by:University of New South Wales. School of Law, 2005. http://handle.unsw.edu.au/1959.4/24292.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
Annotation:
Patients who have undergone treatment that has included the surgical implantation of a prosthetic device can become dissatisfied for many reasons. One cause for dissatisfaction is any adverse event where there is a demonstrable causal nexus with the failure of a device that is defective or at risk of being so. The magnitude of therapeutic product failure is considerable and therapeutic goods such as Vioxx, Thalidomide, silicon-gel-filled breast implants, contaminated blood products, cardiac pacemakers and valves, and orthopaedic devices are testimony to this. Many of these events have exposed a greyish area of Australian law that balances medical negligence with consumer protection and contract law. Australian product liability legislation that regulates the use of therapeutic goods is a complex amalgam of law that has at its foundations the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth). When a surgical device fails there can be exposure to liability. This thesis explores those important issues that can impact on individuals or on organisations and it is evident that where issues of product liability concern implanted surgical devices the current regulations for consumer protection may not always be the most appropriate. It is evident that there is a culture of under-reporting of adverse events to a Therapeutic Good Administration that does not have the resources to investigate the cause for failure of a surgical device. Furthermore, there is a potential for bias and conflict of interest in an environment where the regulator depends on the regulated for the funding of its existence. Other issues include the complex and often undesirable consequences of those partnerships that can evolve with the development of an implantable device and with the undertaking of clinical trials, the role of the learned intermediary, that interface between manufacturer and consumer, and the role of the expert witness, that interface between justice and injustice. These and other matters that can significantly influence any debate of implantable surgical device product liability are explored and recommendations are made that might form the basis of a Therapeutic Goods (Safe Medical Devices) Amendment Act.
3
Jess, Digby Charles. „A comparison of the law relating to legal liability insurances in England and Australia“. Thesis, University of Manchester, 1999. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.488304.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
Annotation:
The aim of this thesis is to examine English and Australian law relating to legal liability insurances, in order to determine whether English law can be regarded as having gone down a less desirable route in resolving the problems that arise. Australia has been chosen as a comparator because of its previous colonial position whereby English common law was directly applicable, but, against that backdrop of shared jurisprudence, the Commonwealth of Australia, and its constituent States, have developed, under independence, their own solutions in this area of law. There are various problems that emerge, both as between the injured third party and the culpable insured defendant, and between that insured and his liability insurer. This analysis is approached by first comparing English and Australian law relating to the extent of the indemnity provided by insurances against legal liabilities incurred by the insured. This is to be found in Chapter 1, where the judicial interpretation of the primary insuring words of such policies is considered, and in Chapter 2, where the legal effect of the main express terms and conditions encountered in both English and Australian policies are discussed. Statutory reform affects the position in Australia. Chapter 3 examines the extent of the problems, and the ramifications, that can arise in the four categories of resistance of the insurer to providing an indemnity to the insured - avoidance ab initio of the policy for non-disclosure or misrepresentation of material facts at inception; repudiation of liability for breach of an insurance warranty; rejection of the claim for breach of a condition precedent or other policy condition; and denial that the claim is within the scope of the policy indemnity. The statutory compulsory regimes adopted in England and Australia with regard to the insuring of motor vehicle liability and employers' liability to their employees are discussed and contrasted in Chapter 4. The claimant third party's direct rights of action against the liability insurer of a judgment debtor are considered in Chapter 5. Finally, conclusions are reached on the preferred approach on all of these aspects.
4
Ludlow, Karinne Anne. „Which little piggy to market? : legal challenges to the commercialisation of agricultural genetically modified organisms in Australia“. Monash University, Faculty of Law, 2004. http://arrow.monash.edu.au/hdl/1959.1/5489.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
5
Golding, Gregory Ray. „The Reform of Misstatement Liability in Australia's Prospectus Laws“. University of Sydney. Law, 2003. http://hdl.handle.net/2123/607.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
Annotation:
This dissertation considers the reforms made to the liability rules in Australia�s prospectus laws during the 1990s. It traces the rewrite of the fundraising provisions at the end of the 1980s as part of the new Corporations Law through to the rewrite of those provisions at the end of the 1990s as part of the CLERP Act initiative. As the law in this area is not particularly well served by detailed judicial or academic analysis in Australia, the dissertation seeks to define the scope of the Australian liability regime by reference to case law analysis, a review of relevant theoretical considerations and comparative analysis with other key jurisdictions. The thesis of the dissertation is that many of the reforms were, particularly initially, misconceived in key respects because of a failure to apply appropriate theoretical underpinnings and to take account of the lessons that could have been learned from a comparative analysis with other key jurisdictions.
6
Dutson, Stuart Terence. „Product liability and private international law : a study of the English and Australian approaches“. Thesis, University of Cambridge, 1996. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.627559.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
5
Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Ethics, liability, and the technical expert: 28 March 1996, Perth, Australia. Carlton, Vic: Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 1996.
Vines, Prue. „Apologies, Liability and Civil Society: Where to from Here?“ In New Directions for Law in Australia. ANU Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.22459/ndla.09.2017.30.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
2
Hardy, Tess. „Good Call: Extending Liability for Employment Contraventions Beyond the Direct Employer“. In New Directions for Law in Australia. ANU Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.22459/ndla.09.2017.05.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
3
Clough, Jonathan. „Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Criminal Liability: Old Challenges in a Transnational World“. In New Directions for Law in Australia. ANU Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.22459/ndla.09.2017.13.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
4
Jensen, Darryn. „Pitfalls of Statutory Reform in Private Law: Recipient Liability for Breach of Trust“. In New Directions for Law in Australia. ANU Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.22459/ndla.09.2017.24.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
6
Ipp, David. „Recent Reforms in Australia to the Law of Negligence with Particular Reference to the Liability of Public Authorities“. In Tom Bingham and the Transformation of the Law, 701–12. Oxford University Press, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199566181.003.0044.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
9
„Vicarious liability and non-delegable duty“. In Contemporary Australian Tort Law, 397–434. Cambridge University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/9781108626224.010.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
Annotation:
This chapter discusses the law on product liability. Common law product liability is based upon the law of negligence. Beginning with the narrow ratio in Donoghue v Stevenson (1932), it further developed the concept of intermediate examination in Grant v Australian Knitting Mills (1936). The relevant statute is the Consumer Protection Act 1987, passed in response to a European Union Directive. This introduces strict liability, when a defective product causes damage. The CPA establishes a hierarchy of possible defendants beginning with the producer. Defences under the CPA include the ‘development risks’ defence to protect scientific and technical innovation. If damage relates to quality or value, the only remedy will be in contract.
Konferenzberichte zum Thema "Liability (Law) Australia":
1
Wullems, Christian, und Anjum Naweed. „Low-Cost Railway Level Crossings: Breaking Down the Barriers“. In 2014 Joint Rail Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/jrc2014-3808.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO und andere Zitierweisen
Annotation:
Level crossing risk continues to be a significant safety concern for the security of rail operations around the world. Over the last decade or so, a third of railway related fatalities occurred as a direct result of collisions between road and rail vehicles in Australia. Importantly, nearly half of these collisions occurred at railway level crossings with no active protection, such as flashing lights or boom barriers. Current practice is to upgrade level crossings that have no active protection. However, the total number of level crossings found across Australia exceed 23,500, and targeting the proportion of these that are considered high risk (e.g. public crossings with passive controls) would cost in excess of AU$3.25 billion based on equipment, installation and commissioning costs of warning devices that are currently type approved. Level crossing warning devices that are low-cost provide a potentially effective control for reducing risk; however, over the last decade, there have been significant barriers and legal issues in both Australia and the US that have foreshadowed their adoption. These devices are designed to have significantly lower lifecycle costs compared with traditional warning devices. They often make use of use of alternative technologies for train detection, wireless connectivity and solar energy supply. This paper describes the barriers that have been encountered for the adoption of these devices in Australia, including the challenges associated with: (1) determining requisite safety levels for such devices; (2) legal issues relating to duty of care obligations of railway operators; and (3) issues of Tort liability around the use of less than fail-safe equipment. This paper provides an overview of a comprehensive safety justification that was developed as part of a project funded by a collaborative rail research initiative established by the Australian government, and describes the conceptual framework and processes being used to justify its adoption. The paper provides a summary of key points from peer review and discusses prospective barriers that may need to be overcome for future adoption. A successful outcome from this process would result in the development of a guideline for decision-making, providing a precedence for adopting low-cost level crossing warning devices in other parts of the world. The framework described in this paper also provides relevance to the review and adoption of analogous technologies in rail and other safety critical industries.
