Lord Denning: An Antipodean Appreciation

Lord Denning: An Antipodean Appreciatio

LORD DENNING AND JUDICIAL ACTIVISM

LORD DENNING AND JUDICIAL ACTIVIS

LEGAL PROTECTION OF SAME-SEX RELATIONSHIPS IN AUSTRALIA

LEGAL PROTECTION OF SAME-SEX RELATIONSHIPS IN AUSTRALI

Miscarriages of Justice - Our Lamentable Failure?

Miscarriages of Justice - Our Lamentable Failure

OF ADVOCATES, DRUNKS AND OTHER PLAYERS: PLAIN TALES FROM AUSTRALIA

When I retired from judicial office after 34 years service (13 of them as a Justice of the High Court of Australia), I was richly rewarded for my labours by the practising Bar.  Here in England, Inner Temple did me the honour of electing me a Bencher.  I was proud to follow Peter Taylor to that office.  In Australia, the Australian Bar Association, the Law Council of Australia and the governing body of my home Bar, the New South Wales Bar Association, conferred on me honorary life memberships.  I say this not to boast but to illustrate the forgiving qualities of barristers for the assaults that judges inflict on them during service in the courts

HUMAN RIGHTS AND MEDIA: THE EXPERIENCE OF THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY ON NORTH KOREA

Even in oppressive countries, those responsible for abuses of human rights normally perform their deeds of commission and omission in private, away from the glare of publicity. Publicity and news attention encourage supporters of global human rights to address the violations of human rights of peoples and individuals. They speak up and demand action. Secrecy is a cloak for terrible crimes and violations.This is why, in the current international situation, those with responsibility for the United Nations’ efforts to advance universal human rights, and to expose violators, have increasingly looked to the media (especially international media) to support their efforts. Between the time in the 1990s when I discharged a mandate as Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Human Rights in Cambodia (1993-6) and the more recent time in which I served as Chair of the Commission of Inquiry (COI) on alleged human rights violations in the Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea (DPRK) (North Korea) (2013-14), I noticed a significant change in the engagement of United Nations personnel with the media. A connection with media became more intensive, more time consuming and more professional. Moreover, it is supported from the top of the Organisation. The Secretary-General of the United Nations (Ban Ki-moon), the High Commissioners for Human Rights, other agency heads and mandate-holders have become much more willing to engage with media and much more skilful in doing so. By this I mean not only local newspapers, radio and television interviews but also international media and the new social networks, blogs, Reddit and the internet generally. Together these media can bring news, information and opinions of UN experts on human rights to an audience far wider than that which, in the past, had access to UN reports on human rights concerns.

APPELLATE ADVOCACY - NEW CHALLENGES. THE DAME ANN EBSWORTH MEMORIAL LECTURE

This lecture honours Dame Ann Ebsworth who died in 2002 of cancer.  She was but sixty-four years of age.  As I am the inaugural lecturer, I will record some personal facts, although her memory will be green for her friends, many of whom have come to this lecture to remember her and to celebrate her life. Ann Ebsworth was born on 19 May 1937.  Her father was an officer in the Royal Marines.  She was raised a Roman Catholic and derived from her religion and her parents strong convictions and a sense of public service.  She read history at the University of London where she was known as a formidable debater.  In 1962 she was called to the Bar by Gray’s Inn.  Her practice, which was in Liverpool, was predominantly criminal with some family work (which increased) and some civil work (which diminished).  She rose to be head of her chambers.  She was known as a considerable opponent, particularly in criminal cases.  She was described as an “… effective and formidable advocate, thorough in preparation, lucid and courteous in style and entirely unflappable.

MAGNA CARTA 1215 TO NORTH KOREA 2015: ADVANCING THE IDEAL OF LEGAL RESTRAINTS ON GOVERNMENTAL POWER

On the 800th anniversary of the reluctant acceptance of a charter of rights and obligations by King John of England in 1215, many books have been written, essays published and lectures given, examining the relevance of this step in the long constitutional history of England (if any) and for the world of today.Some commentators, have doubted any relevance.Lord [Jonathan] Sumption, a judge of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, and an expert in mediaeval English history, has rejected any significance in what sounds to Australian ears as a somewhat condescending remark.‘High minded tosh’, he called it. Geoffrey Robertson QC, of Doughty Street Chambers, London, via Epping in Sydney, expressed somewhat similar views, but more politely. Michael Beloff QC, in this journal, has traced every case of the past century in which Magna Carta had been cited to reach a conclusion that its actual contemporary relevance was small.Other writers and lecturers were willing to find a greater materiality in the Charter for the world of today.

THE AUSTRALIAN AND INDIAN CONSTITUTIONS, SIMILARITIES, DIFFERENCES AND THE CHALLENGE OF CONSTITUTIONAL CHOICE

In this article, based on an address to the India Law Institute in New Delhi, the author, a former Justice of the High Court of Australia lists ten features of the constitutions of Australia and India that exhibit similarities; ten features where there are sometimes marked differences; and two areas of operation that illustrate the fact that in constitutional adjudication, especially, judicial decision-makers face what Julius Stone described as “leeways for choice”.  By reference to decisions in Australia and India on issues of race, aboriginality and human sexuality, the article identifies the inescapable challenge of choice and suggests useful guideposts

THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA AND THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES - A CENTENARY REFLECTION

In October 2003 in Melbourne, the High Court of Australia celebrated the centenary of its first sitting.  According to the Australian Constitution, it is the “Federal Supreme Court” of the Australian Commonwealth.1  Although the Constitution envisaged the establishment of the High Court, the first sitting of the new court did not take place until a statute had provided for the court and the appointment of its first Justices.  They took their seats in a ceremony held in the Banco Court in the Supreme Court of Victoria on 6 October 1903.  Exactly a century later, the present Justices assembled in the same courtroom for a sitting to mark the first century of the Court