10 Results
Filter Results
0000000000VGLS-PUBLIC
Author(s) 
Walsh, N. G. Gullan, P. K. Barley, R. H. (Rachel) National Herbarium of Victoria. Victoria. Environmental Studies Division.
Format: 
Books
Publication Date(s) 
1984
Available:
Author(s) 
Ward, B. G. Walsh, P. H. Western Australia. Department of Conservation and Land Management.
Format: 
Books
Publication Date(s) 
1988
Available:
Author(s) 
Loyn, Richard H. Norman, Ian, 1942- Papas, Phil J. Potts, Joanne. Dixon, B.
Electronic: 
Format: 
Books
Summary: 
Melbourne Water Corporation (MWC) commissioned the Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research to compile data from various sources to help determine likely impacts of increased salinity at the "old lagoons" (85W, 145W and Walsh?s Lagoon) at the Western Treatment Plant (WTP) near Werribee. The increased salinity is expected to occur in association with brine disposal from a proposed salt reduction plant, designed to produce recycled water suitable for use in offsite irrigation of vegetable crops. MWC has obligations to conserve waterbirds at the WTP, which is listed as a wetland of international importance under the Ramsar Convention.
Publication Date(s) 
2006
Available:
Author(s) 
Walsh, N. G. Barley, R. H. (Rachel) Gullan, P. K. National Herbarium of Victoria. Victoria. Environmental Studies Division.
Format: 
Books
Publication Date(s) 
1984
Available:
Author(s) 
Furness, R. W. Rainbow, P. S.
Format: 
Books
Publication Date(s) 
1990
Available:
Author(s) 
Gullan, P. K. Earl, G. E. (Gillian E.) Forbes, S. J. (Stephen J.) Barley, R. H. Walsh, Neville G.
Format: 
Books
Publication Date(s) 
1983
Available:
Author(s) 
Bailey, S. H.
Format: 
Books
Summary: 
The extent to which judicial review is available as a remedy in respect of the contracting decisions of public authorities has caused difficulty for as long as judicial review has existed in anything like its modern form. It forms part of a wider set of issues concerning the proper scope of judicial review proceedings. The purpose of this article is to consider the position that has now been reached in the case law and to suggest a way forward. The case law tends to support the proposition that for contracting decisions taken in the exercise of statutory powers to be subject to judicial review, there must be some specific public law element beyond the mere fact that the body is exercising a statutory power to contract. It has been argued by others, for some time, that this adds an unnecessary and undesirable complication. The present article analyses the more recent cases and suggests that they amply demonstrate that the law is overly complex and that the attention of the courts is being diverted from a proper consideration of important substantive issues. In consequence much litigation time is wasted and, in some cases, the right outcomes are not reached. The following sections in turn set out the background and context for these issues; outline what is submitted, with respect, to be the sensible approach adopted by Elias J. in R. (on the application of Molinaro) v Kensington RLBC; consider the cases on the need for an additional public law element in a number of different areas; and set out conclusion.
Publication Date(s) 
2007
Available:
Author(s) 
Gullan, P. K., author. Earl, G. E. (Gillian E.) Forbes, S. J. (Stephen J.) Barley, R. H. Walsh, Neville G.
Format: 
Books
Publication Date(s) 
1984
Available:
Author(s) 
Higgins, Andrew.
Format: 
Books
Summary: 
The article proposes an alternative model for dealing with non-compliance with process requirements to CPR r.3.9. The model links the court's response to non-compliance with to its major case-management responsibilities: protecting the right to fair trial and efficiently and equitably allocating the court's resources. In every case the court should fix a realistic trial date or window at the earliest practicable opportunity, as Sir Rupert Jackson recommended in his review of civil litigation costs. Furthermore, the trial date ought to be viewed as a marker of the parties' right to fair trial within a reasonable time under art.6 of the ECHR, and be rescheduled only in exceptional circumstances. Having fixed a trial date, and being committed to retain it, the court should take into account three factors in deciding whether to grant relief from a sanction under r.3.9: (1) whether granting relief would prejudice the other paries' right to fair trial; (2) whether granting relief would result in the court allocating disproportionate resources to the dispute; and (3) whether there was a good reason for the failure to comply. It argues that the proposed model is both an effective means of protecting the right to fair trial for all court users, and reducing non-compliance in practice.
Publication Date(s) 
2010
Available: