Daily wrap
A precedent-setting legal judgment in Australia was based on scientific evidence that was “very weak”, says an international expert who gave evidence.
Doctors and lawyers can't come to a consensus on the science of shaken baby syndrome 50 years after it was first proposed as a theory. Does shaking a baby actually lead to the brain damage seen in historical and current cases? And why has the argument become so heated that some describe it as a war?
The fund’s top lawyer has quietly left after an external investigation into complaints of bullying within the legal team and created further dysfunction.
Like our newsletter?
Chances are, someone you know will too.
Editor’s picks
He’s the art-loving ‘Chairman of Fun’ tipped for the High Court, but NSW Chief Justice Andrew Bell is also an unusually outspoken advocate for the rule of law.
[1] The applicant, Ms Hendry, applies for me to recuse myself from this proceeding. For the following reasons, the application will be dismissed. However as will be explained, the manner in which Ms Hendry has pursued the application is such to give rise to apprehended bias on my part. On the Court's own motion, therefore, the proceeding will therefore be referred to the Court's National Operations Registry for reallocation.
[2] The factual basis of the recusal application appears from three affidavits Ms Hendry has filed, as well as a memorandum I sent to the parties, and an affidavit affirmed by Fiona Stanton, who is briefed in this proceeding as counsel for the first respondent, the State of Western Australia….
…
[5] I have been a member of Facebook since 2007. As is mentioned in the Memorandum, Ms Stanton is 'friends' on Facebook with me. She is also 'friends' on Facebook with my wife. Ms Hendry's first affidavit, sworn on 18 July 2025, contains evidence that my wife 'liked' a post Ms Stanton made on 21 May 2022 and that Ms Stanton 'liked' a post my wife made on 1 August 2017. It also contains evidence that Ms Stanton was one of six people who 'liked' a profile picture that was publicly posted to Facebook when I changed it, on 12 June 2019.
…
[104] The principles set out above include a recognition that, for all their training, judges are human beings, and not mere reasoning machines. The simple reality it that it would be difficult for any judge to be objective about a person who has conducted themselves in this way in connection with the judge's family circumstances. A fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend that such a judge might not bring an impartial mind to the merits of the proceeding the person has brought. To be clear, it is not the strident and unjustified personal criticisms alone which lead to this conclusion. Judges face such criticisms frequently. It is the way Ms Hendry has based those criticisms on a significant tragedy in my family that creates a logical connection between her conduct in this proceeding, and a reasonable apprehension that I might not decide the case on the merits.
This video discusses the letters from 1975 between the Australian Governor-General, Sir John Kerr, and Buckingham Palace in the lead-up to the Senate vote to defer the passage of supply on 16 October 1975. They show the war-gaming about different scenarios that was going on, well before any decision to block or defer supply had been made.
A King & Wood Mallesons report found consumer class actions are driving up litigation costs, with emerging risks due to data breaches and privacy law changes.
Livestream today - NTD17/2024 Lesley Turner v Jacinta Nampijinpa Price - YouTube
The Library Bulletin links to the latest Victorian and High Court of Australia judgments, Victorian legislation, and select articles, for the current fortnight.
We’d love your help shaping Headnote.
Got feedback or ideas? Want to work with us?
Hit reply!