Daily wrap
The delivery of Justice Lee’s judgment in the Lehrmann defamation proceedings will be live streamed here from 10:15am AEST.
The decision can be found here - Council of the New South Wales Bar Association v Waterstreet - NSW Caselaw
For anyone not following our social media pages. Don’t let Ollie down.
Editor’s picks
Jury science is fraught with difficulty. Since legal and institutional hurdles render it all but impossible to study live criminal jury deliberation, researchers make use of various indirect methods to evaluate jury performance. But each of these methods are open to methodological criticism and, strikingly, some of the highest-profile jury research programmes in recent years have reached opposing conclusions. Uncertainty about jury performance is an obstacle for legal reform—ongoing debates about the ‘justice gap’ for complainants of sexual offences has rendered these problems stark. This paper proposes a way to advance the debate.
Good ideas lost in a broken system that’s overdue for reform - Prof George Williams [The Australian paywall]
We need a constitutional commission to ‘road-test’ worthwhile reforms, such as fixed four-year terms for federal parliament, before referendums are held.
“On the 3 October 2023 the online divorce portal operated by HM Courts and Tribunals Service [‘HMCTS’] issued a final order of divorce in proceedings between Mrs Williams, the applicant wife, and Mr Williams, the respondent husband. The solicitors acting for the applicant, who had used the online divorce portal to apply for the final order, did so without the instruction or authority of their client, Mrs Williams. The solicitors have explained that the member of staff involved had intended to apply for a final order of divorce for another client, in a different divorce case, but inadvertently opened the electronic case file in ‘Williams v Williams’ and proceeded to apply for a final order in that case.”
What did you think of today's newsletter?
For enquiries contact [email protected]