|
ASIC V Kobelt
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Kobelt is a decision of the High Court of Australia. It was an appeal brought by ASIC against a Mr Kobelt, seeking to overturn a unanimous decision of the Full Federal Court. The court had found that while Mr Kobelt had contravened s29(1) of the ''National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009'' (Cth) (for engaging in ' credit activity' unlicensed); he did not engage in ' unconscionable conduct in connection with financial services' in contravention with s12CB(1) of the ''ASIC Act''. Unconscionable conduct in connection with financial services. A majority of the High Court dismissed ASIC's appeal. Factual background The respondent to the appeal, Mr Kobelt, ran a general store in Mintabie, South Australia. He was found by the Federal Court to have supplied credit to customers at his store via a system referred to as a 'book-up' credit system. Most credit was supplied for the purchase of used cars. Customers were not required t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
High Court Of Australia
The High Court of Australia is Australia's apex court. It exercises Original jurisdiction, original and appellate jurisdiction on matters specified within Constitution of Australia, Australia's Constitution. The High Court was established following passage of the ''Judiciary Act 1903''. It derives its authority from Chapter III of the Australian Constitution, which vests it responsibility for the judiciary, judicial power of the Commonwealth. Important legal instruments pertaining to the High Court include the ''Judiciary Act 1903'' and the ''High Court of Australia Act 1979''.. Its bench is composed of seven justices, including a Chief Justice of Australia, Chief Justice, currently Susan Kiefel. Justices of the High Court are appointed by the Governor-General of Australia, Governor-General on the Advice (constitutional law), advice of the Prime Minister of Australia, Prime Minister and are appointed permanently until their mandatory retirement at age 70, unless they retire ea ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Respondent
{{unreferenced, date=February 2012 A respondent is a person who is called upon to issue a response to a communication made by another. The term is used in legal contexts, in survey methodology, and in psychological conditioning. Legal usage In legal usage, this specifically refers to the defendant in a legal proceeding commenced by a petition, or to an appellee, or the opposing party, in an appeal of a decision by an initial fact-finder. In the United States Senate, the two sides in an impeachment trial are called the management and the respondent. Survey and psychology usage In psychology, respondent conditioning is a synonym for classical conditioning or Pavlovian conditioning. Respondent behavior specifically refers to the behavior consistently elicited by a reflexive or classically conditioned stimulus. In population survey, a respondent is a person replying with answers to a survey. Depending on the survey questions and context, respondent answers may represent themse ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Melbourne Law School
Melbourne Law School is one of the professional graduate schools of the University of Melbourne. Located in Carlton, Victoria, Melbourne Law School is Australia's oldest law school, and offers J.D., LL.M, Ph.D, and LL.D degrees. In 2021-22, THE World University Rankings ranked the law school as 5th best in the world and first both in Australia and Asia-Pacific. Alumni of Melbourne Law School include four Prime Ministers of Australia, three Governors-General, four Chief Justices of Australia and thirteen Commonwealth Attorneys-General. Alumni include a current Judge of the International Court of Justice, a current Justice of the High Court of Australia, the current Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia, the current Governor of Victoria, the current Solicitor-General of Australia, the current President of the Australian Human Rights Commission, the current Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commissioner and the current Chairwoman of the Victorian Bar Council. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Katy Barnett
Katy Barnett is an Australian academic and author. She joined Melbourne Law School in 2006 as a sessional lecturer and was permanently appointed a Professor of Law in 2010. Her expertise is in private law, with particular expertise on the law of remedies, contract, equity, legal history, as well as animal law. She has been described as 'one of the most eminent authors and commentators' in the field of remedies and private law. Her work has been referred to by jurists such as Australia's (then) Chief Justice Robert French. In addition to her writing on private law, she has been cited for her academic work analysing disparities between male and female academics in citation metrics, especially regarding the metric of apex court citations. Early life and education Katy completed an LLB with Honours and a BA with majors in English, History, and Medieval Studies at the University of Melbourne in 1999. Before her academic career, she worked as a research assistant at the Court of Appe ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Legislative Intent
In law, the legislative intent of the legislature in enacting legislation may sometimes be considered by the judiciary to interpret the law (see judicial interpretation). The judiciary may attempt to assess legislative intent where legislation is ambiguous or does not appear to directly, adequately address a particular issue, or appears to have been a legislative drafting error. The courts have repeatedly held that when a statute is clear and unambiguous, the inquiry into legislative intent ends at that point. It is only when a statute could be interpreted in more than one fashion that legislative intent must be inferred from sources other than the actual text of the statute. Sources Courts frequently look at the following sources in attempting to determine the goals and purposes that the legislative body had in mind when it passed the law: * the text of the bill as proposed to the legislative body * amendments to the bill that were proposed and accepted or rejected * the rec ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Legislative History
Legislative history includes any of various materials generated in the course of creating legislation, such as committee reports, analysis by legislative counsel, committee hearings, floor debates, and histories of actions taken. Legislative history is used for discovering sources of information about a legislature's intent in enacting a law, although jurists disagree widely about the extent (if any) to which a statute's legislative history has bearing on the meaning of its text. Sweden Swedish courts frequently avail themselves of the legislative history ( sv, förarbeten, literally "travaux préparatoires") in interpreting the law. Valid documents of legislative history are often taken to be official government reports, the bills (''proposition'') presented by the Swedish government before the Riksdag, statements made by the responsible minister at the government session at which the bill was adopted (''regeringssammanträde''), the report on the bill by the relevant Riksdag ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Hobson's Choice
A Hobson's choice is a free choice in which only one thing is actually offered. The term is often used to describe an illusion that multiple choices are available. The most well known Hobson's choice is "I'll give you a choice: take it or leave it", wherein "leaving it" is strongly undesirable. The phrase is said to have originated with Thomas Hobson (1544–1631), a livery stable owner in Cambridge, England, who offered customers the choice of either taking the horse in his stall nearest to the door or taking none at all. Origins According to a plaque underneath a painting of Hobson donated to Cambridge Guildhall, Hobson had an extensive stable of some 40 horses. This gave the appearance to his customers that, upon entry, they would have their choice of mounts, when in fact there was only one: Hobson required his customers to take the horse in the stall closest to the door. This was to prevent the best horses from always being chosen, which would have caused those horses to be ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Collective Action
Collective action refers to action taken together by a group of people whose goal is to enhance their condition and achieve a common objective. It is a term that has formulations and theories in many areas of the social sciences including psychology, sociology, anthropology, political science and economics. The social identity model Researchers Martijn van Zomeren, Tom Postmes, and Russell Spears conducted a meta-analysis of over 180 studies of collective action, in an attempt to integrate three dominant socio-psychological perspectives explaining antecedent conditions to this phenomenon – injustice, efficacy, and identity. In their resultant 2008 review article, an integrative Social Identity Model of Collective Action (SIMCA) was proposed which accounts for interrelationships among the three predictors as well as their predictive capacities for collective action. An important assumption of this approach is that people tend to respond to subjective states of disadvantage, whi ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Paciocco V ANZ
David M. Paciocco is a justice of the Court of Appeal for Ontario in Toronto, Ontario. Paciocco has authored several books on criminal law and is considered one of Canada's foremost experts on the law of evidence. Career Paciocco completed his undergraduate degree at the University of Western Ontario and a master's degree in law from the University of Oxford. Paciocco was hired by the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law in 1982 and was called to the Ontario bar in 1983. He was a member of the legal team that defended the Canadian Red Cross in the tainted blood scandal. From 1994 to 1998, Paciocco was counsel in private practice. Paciocco also later taught at the University of Windsor Faculty of Law. In 1999, he published ''Getting Away With Murder: The Canadian Criminal Justice System'', a book intended for the public about the Canadian criminal justice system. In June 2005, Paciocco was nominated to receive an Honorary Doctorate from Laurentian University. In 2010 a Toronto Sta ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
James Allsop
James Leslie Bain Allsop (born April 1953) is Chief Justice of the Federal Court of Australia, in office since 1 March 2013. He was previously President of the New South Wales Court of Appeal, where he presided from 2 June 2008 to 28 February 2013. Education Allsop attended Sydney Grammar School and completed year 12 in 1970. Allsop then graduated from the University of Sydney with a Bachelor of Arts in 1974 and a Bachelor of Laws in 1980. He won the University Medal in law.Who's Who in Australia Career Allsop was admitted to the New South Wales Bar in 1981, and was appointed Senior Counsel in 1994. He was appointed Queen's Counsel in Western Australia in 1998. From 2001 to 2008, Allsop was a Justice of the Federal Court of Australia. He has also served as an additional Justice of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory (2003–08). Allsop was appointed the President of the New South Wales Court of Appeal on 2 June 2008. On 20 November 2012, Commonwealth Atto ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Plain Meaning Rule
The plain meaning rule, also known as the literal rule, is one of three rules of statutory construction traditionally applied by English courts. The other two are the "mischief rule" and the " golden rule". The plain meaning rule dictates that statutes are to be interpreted using the ordinary meaning of the language of the statute. In other words, a statute is to be read word for word and is to be interpreted according to the ordinary meaning of the language, unless a statute explicitly defines some of its terms otherwise or unless the result would be cruel or absurd. Ordinary words are given their ordinary meaning, technical terms are given their technical meaning, and local, cultural terms are recognized as applicable. The plain meaning rule is the mechanism that prevents courts from taking sides in legislative or political issues. Additionally, it is the mechanism that underlies textualism and, to a certain extent, originalism. Meaning To avoid ambiguity, legislatures of ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Unconscionability
Unconscionability (sometimes known as unconscionable dealing/conduct in Australia) is a doctrine in contract law that describes terms that are so extremely unjust, or overwhelmingly one-sided in favor of the party who has the superior bargaining power, that they are contrary to good conscience. Typically, an ''unconscionable'' contract is held to be unenforceable because no reasonable or informed person would otherwise agree to it. The perpetrator of the conduct is not allowed to benefit, because the consideration offered is lacking, or is so obviously inadequate, that to enforce the contract would be unfair to the party seeking to escape the contract. Overview Unconscionability is determined by examining the circumstances of the parties when the contract was made, such as their bargaining power, age, and mental capacity. Other issues might include lack of choice, superior knowledge, and other obligations or circumstances surrounding the bargaining process. Unconscionable condu ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
