Raygun issues legal threat

Was this email forwarded to you?

Sign up for our free daily email newsletter at headnote.com.au

Daily wrap  

• Raygun-inspired musical cancelled over legal threats, Sydney comedian says - ABC News
   

• ‘Unlawful’: Woolworths wins bid to clear picket line outside Melbourne warehouse | Woolworths | The Guardian
   

• Criminal barristers forced to pick up Legal Aid tab [The Australian paywall]

  Canberra barristers are being forced to foot the bill for their client’s cases due to the chronic underfunding of Legal Aid, as the ACT government slashes critical funds to community legal services.
   

• Dazy v Dazie: The Iconic sues Shein for ripping off exclusive label [SMH paywall]

  The Australian retailer and its Chinese rival are at loggerheads.
   

• Super Retail back in court over sacked legal officer [The Australian paywall]

  Former Super Retail chair Sally Pitkin has retained new lawyers as the company returns to court this week to face off against the chief legal officer it sacked.
   

• Santos sold vague plan as carbon blueprint, court told

  Australia's largest natural gas company did not have a "credible and tangible" plan to achieve net zero by 2040, a court has been told, even though it promoted its environmental road map to investors.
   

• Brisbane environmental activist claims 'major win' after judge strikes out multiple allegations in Adani case - ABC News
   

Editor’s picks  

• Statement on the use of artificial intelligence in Australian legal practice | VLSBC
   

• Appointments to re-establish the Administrative Review Council | Our ministers – Attorney-General’s portfolio

  I am pleased to announce the appointments of Professor Margaret Allars SC as Chair and Professor Matthew Groves, Dr Graeme Innes AM, and Mrs Kerry Staines as members of the re-established Administrative Review Council (ARC).

   

• ‘Rape victims cannot be automatically believed’: Williamson [The Australian paywall]

  Former ACT chief prosecutor Anthony Williamson’s comments come amid a growing civil war in Canberra’s tight-knit legal profession over the handling of rape cases.
   

• Harkness v Banks (No 2) [2024] VSC 709 (18 November 2024)

  [67] There is a great weight of Australian authority for the proposition that prosecutorial decisions are insusceptible of judicial review. The statement to that effect in Maxwell has been applied on numerous occasions by the High Court, intermediate courts of appeal including the Victorian Court of Appeal, and single judges of this Court.[86] I accept the Director’s submission that, as a single judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria, I am bound by that authority to conclude that the answer to the constitutional question is ‘no’.

  [68] However, I have some reservations about that conclusion and the ‘principle of unreviewability’ propounded by the Director. I set out below my reservations, and the reasons for them, in case the question comes to be considered by a higher court.
   

• Choi v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice [2022] NSWCA 170 (1 September 2022)

  [134] As to the suggestion that there was a denial of procedural fairness by reference to the fact that the primary judge was not robed or wearing a wig (or the contention that the primary judge was wearing a brown jacket), even apart from the fact that the Court Attire Policy governs the manner in which barristers are to appear before the Court, it cannot seriously be suggested that the wearing of robes or wigs is an requirement of natural justice or that a failure to do so is contrary to the rule of law. There are indeed many Courts in this country in which wigs are not worn in court hearings (including in recent years the High Court).

  [204] Ms Choi advances the following reasons for the proposition that the primary judge was here exercising an administrative function: first, that the primary judge was not wearing a wig and a robe (rather, a light brown suit, a white shirt and no tie) and “did not introduce me to the name etc” (thus contending that Bellew J “chose to act like an administrator”)…
   

• Australian Law Reform Commission to commence new Inquiry into surrogacy laws | ALRC
   

• Why Australia’s Social Media Ban for Kids May Breach Its Constitution – Verfassungsblog
   

Like our free newsletter? The best way to support us is to tell your colleagues about our newsletter!

We love feedback - [email protected]