- Lai v Chamberlains
The Court of Appeal has removed (civil) barristerial immunity in NZ.
Still don't know where I stand on the main issue.
(More?) interesting sub-issues though:
- Should the overruling be prospective or retrospective? (Real questions of legal certainty and people's expectations here)
- Should the Court of Appeal be able to overrule its previous decisions? Or should it now kick things up to the Supreme Court?
- Should I have listened all those years ago in Law and Society when we did "right"/"no-right" "privilege"/"duty" "power"/"disability" "immunity"/"liability"?
PS cf the decision of the Australian High Court a couple of days later: D'Orta-Ekenaike v Victoria Legal Aid [2005] HCA 12
Course Lecturer
Dean Knight
Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law
Associate, New Zealand Centre for Public Law
Victoria University of Wellington
New Zealand
PhD Candidate
London School of Economics and Political Science
United Kingdom
Email: dean.knight@vuw.ac.nz
Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law
Associate, New Zealand Centre for Public Law
Victoria University of Wellington
New Zealand
PhD Candidate
London School of Economics and Political Science
United Kingdom
Email: dean.knight@vuw.ac.nz
Course Outline
Lord Justice Lawton in Maxwell v Department of Trade and Industry [1974] 2 All ER 122 said:
This course examines the elephantine concept of fairness in the law, along with other contemporary legal issues.
"From time to time ... lawyers and judges have tried to define what constitutes fairness. Like defining an elephant, it is not easy to do, although fairness in practice has the elephantine quality of being easy to recognise. As a result of these efforts a word in common usage has acquired the trappings of legalism: 'acting fairly' has become 'acting in accordance with the rules of natural justice', and on occasion has been dressed up with Latin tags. This phrase in my opinion serves no useful purpose and in recent years it has encouraged lawyers to try to put those who hold inquiries into legal straitjackets.... For the purposes of my judgment I intend to ask myself this simple question: did the [decision-maker] act fairly towards the plaintiff?"
This course examines the elephantine concept of fairness in the law, along with other contemporary legal issues.
Course Archive
-
▼
2005
(54)
-
▼
March
(12)
- Televising Parliament
- Terri Schiavo - removal of feeding tube
- The courts and Buddhist Karmapa controversy
- Air-India Verdict: Both Not Guilty
- UN Committee on Elimination of Racial Discriminati...
- Transpower - upper north island grid upgrade
- UN Committee on Elimination of Racial Discriminati...
- US Supreme Court - capital punishment and minors
- Relationships Bill
- Barristerial immunity
- What's with the elephants?
- wahoo!
-
▼
March
(12)
Search Course
Course Resources
- Knight (with Cassie), "The Scope of Judicial Review: Who and What may be Reviewed?"
- Knight, "'I’m Not Gay – Not That There’s Anything Wrong With That!': Are Unwanted Imputations of Gayness Defamatory?"
- Knight, "A Murky Methodology: Standards of Review in Administrative Law"
- Knight, "Ameliorating the Collateral Damage Caused by Collateral Attack in Administrative Law"
- Knight, "An Objectionable Offence: A Critique of the Possession Offence in the Films, Videos, Publications Classification Act 1993"
- Knight, "Brothels, bylaws, prostitutes, and proportionality"
- Knight, "Dunne v Canwest TVWorks Ltd: Enhancing or Undermining the Democratic and Constitutional Balance?"
- Knight, "Local authority decision-making, community views, and Stadium Aotearoa"
- Knight, "Local Democracy and the Consideration of Community Views: Obligation and Observance"
- Knight, "Mapping the Rainbow of Review: Recognising Variable Intensity"
- Knight, "Power to Make Bylaws"
- Knight, "Shaking Our Constitutional Foundations"
- Knight, "Simple, Fair, Discretionary Administrative Law"
- Knight, "The (Continuing) Regulation of Prostitution by Local Authorities"
No comments:
Post a Comment