Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian law: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
 
(23 intermediate revisions by 12 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talk header}}
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|
{{WikiProject Australia}}
{{WikiProject Law}}
}}


==[[Codelfa Construction v State Rail Authority of New South Wales]]==
== Infobox court case ==
Hi folks. I've created the above page and would love some feedback from editors in the law community. If anyone has recommendations for where to look for this, or whether this group might be interested in reviewing my page, please let me know. Thanks so much!--[[User:Bofn8828|Bofn8828]] ([[User talk:Bofn8828|talk]]) 23:11, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
:I'll have a look {{ping|Bofn8828}}. I have moved the page to add "Pty Ltd" to the name and will tidy up some of the references, but it is a good start. [[User:Find bruce|Find bruce]] ([[User talk:Find bruce|talk]]) 00:46, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your help! I really struggled with adhering to the citation style for cases as a first time user. You have greatly improved the quality of the page [[User:Find bruce|Find bruce]]--[[User:Bofn8828|Bofn8828]] ([[User talk:Bofn8828|talk]])
:Yes I found the citations a bit tricky at first but once you get your head around the [[Template:cite AustLII|cite AustLII template]] it is pretty easy. In terms of the article content, a couple of suggestions for improvement. The decision section is usually limited to what the High Court actually decided. Commentary & discussion as to the rationale & comparisons with English law would then be in the next section. This is one of the most cited Australian cases (see {{url|www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=1982+HCA+24|LawCite}}) and for the most part uncontroversial, but academic papers, quite understandably, focus on the areas of controversy. It seems to me the article is focused a little too much on both the areas of controversy and the comparison with English law. On that note, Codelfa in 1982 can't have diverged from the English position in 1997. My recollection was that the English position has changed over time but the High Court declined to do so. These are minor points and you are under no obligation to agree with them & like I said the article is a good start. [[User:Find bruce|Find bruce]] ([[User talk:Find bruce|talk]]) 21:21, 31 October 2018 (UTC)


== How active is this project? ==
I've added a proposed Infobox at [[User:Thebainer/Infobox court case]], which displays information about court cases. I created this with [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian law]] in mind, but really this could be used for any court. I thought I'd throw it open for comments before I start adding it to articles. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] 08:57, 12 May 2005 (UTC)


Hi - I have been responsible for most of the recent activity in AL’s sister project, [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian crime|WP Australian crime]] (in occasional bursts), though apart from that, that project is probably a candidate for an "inactive" tag. Was wondering about that here... I did a few housekeeping edits today (feel free to let me know if something wasn't quite right and I'll rectify) but was wondering if anyone or anything is still active here? Thanks. [[User:Jabberjaw|'''JabberJaw''']] [[User talk:Jabberjaw|(''talk'')]] 02:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
==Tasks list==


Australian sub projects are all 'live' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/ on close examination - an in most cases the notion of activity is as to whether there are any processes conducted - usually against the log process such as:-
Would anyone mind if I moved this to the project page as opposed to here? I didn't even know this was here until today! [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 13:09, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)


:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Perh articles by quality log
:No, it'd probably fit better out there. When I copied the WikiProject template it had an old 'to do' style thing on the talk page, I just changed it yesterday to this 'open tasks' format instead. Now that it's in this form it probably would be better out there where everyone can see it. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 22:04, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Where assessment or changes in assessment are indicators - and each Australian project has varying degrees of intensity as to where participants in some projects are adequately active in keeping up with that project.


Another project component is the presence of any activity at the talk page of the project. Or in people adding themselves as participants.
Hi guys. I'm new here, a law student and as a fresh face not yet cynical ;). In exams at the moment but over the next few weeks planning to do a bit of work on [[Australian contract law]]. If things need research/citation I'm happy to do that sort of thing because it's an intersting way to learn. Man, I sound naive don't I... wait until I'm in practice, I'll become [[Lionel Hutz|stereotypical]] soon enough. --[[User:Mjec|mjec]] 12:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)


In most cases querying whether a project is active or not is counter productive. Just edit and get on with it, making sure you get over your lack of assessing - and the project is definitily alive. Asking the question doesnt help, editing alway does. [[User:JarrahTree|JarrahTree]] 10:21, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
== [[Case citation]] ==
I have been adding case citations for other countries and I've added a section for australia. Since I'm not familiar with it, there's liable to be mistakes. If anyone with australian citation knowledge would like to contribute that would be great. -[[User:PullUpYourSocks|PullUpYourSocks]] 17:02, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)


== [[Template:Infobox court case|Infobox court case]]: Substituting 'opinion' with 'judgment' ==
==Revisiting the dot: an English dilemma==


I have added a suggestion on the [[Template talk:Infobox court case|talk page of the above template]] that it be amended so that a different term for 'opinions' can be included. Opinions does not seem correct in an Australian context - it is not in common usage, ''judgments'' is the term used. Added here in case anyone wants to chime in over there. [[User:Local Variable|Local Variable]] ([[User talk:Local Variable|talk]]) 16:04, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
I've just been browsing some of the more general law articles, and I've just realised that all of the articles on English cases use the dot in their title. This creates the odd situation where half our articles are going to use it, and half are not. I'm really not fussed which way we go, but either way, both the English and Australian articles probably should be using the same format.


== Big Six (law firms) recent changes ==
If you haven't already, you might also want to take a look at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Law]], which seems to be doing some good work already - there might be some things we could take away from there to use here. [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 04:23, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


There have recently been a lot of [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Big_Six_%28law_firms%29&type=revision&diff=1021144901&oldid=1021041653 changes] on the [[Big Six (law firms)]] article. I am hoping some experienced Wikipedian who is interested in Australian law topics can look at them, as it's beyond my ability to follow.
'''''The dot is dead, long live the dot.''''' The full stop in case citation abreviations (including the 'v') is no longer in use in contemporary legal publishing in Australia. It is archane. Lets not revive it on wiki. [[User:FedLawyer|FedLawyer]] 15:21, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


My concern is that two editors (or maybe one user with two names) are turning the article into something it is not intended to be. It appears to be morphing into an article about current prominent law firms, whereas I think the article is meant to be about the '''term''' ''Big Six'' itself, and its earlier use for the 'top' law firms in Australia. I have put my concerns on [[Talk:Big_Six_(law_firms)#Propose_separate_article_for_Top-tier_law_firms_(Australia)|talk]], and also on the users' talk pages, [[User_talk:AustralianLawMan|1]] and [[User_talk:AustralianLegalRankings|2]]. Now it's getting way too confusing for me.
==Legislation==


If there's someone active here, maybe [[user:Local Variable|Local Variable]], for instance, could they take a look, please? Apologies if this is not the appropriate place to ask, but some of the boards I looked at seem too extreme, as I am uncertain of the seriousness of the problem, or even if it is a problem. Also, mildly concerned if there could be a touch of conflict of interest? ... Just that they only edit Law Firm articles, but that may be only because they're new. Please ignore this, if inappropriate. Thank you [[Special:Contributions/49.177.64.138|49.177.64.138]] ([[User talk:49.177.64.138|talk]]) 14:51, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
As usual, the US seems to be far ahead of us - take a look at [[List of United States federal legislation]]. Any interest in getting a similar list together here? [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 04:25, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
: {{ping|49.177.64.138}} Thanks for drawing my attention to this article. I will have a look at those edits, and make any edits I think are needed to maintain the [[WP:NPOV]] and [[WP:NOPROMO]] policies. I am slightly concerned that there is [[WP:SOCK|sockpuppetry]] involved between those users, based on similarity of edit summaries and edit history. Opening a case at [[WP:SPI]] may be warranted. [[User:Local Variable|Local Variable]] ([[User talk:Local Variable|talk]]) 15:09, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
:: In the meantime, I have placed a notice on the talk page of each user advising of the one account policy. If suspicious editing continues on both accounts, I'll look at further options like SPI. [[User:Local Variable|Local Variable]] ([[User talk:Local Variable|talk]]) 15:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC)


==Help: how to find details of cases that make legal history in NSW?==
:I've cobbled together a list of a few important Acts over at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian law/Legislation|/Legislation]], and there's a few I'd be happy to make a start on. Any ideas about how to organise article on legislation? --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 13:51, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
I hope this is the right place to ask. I am writing a WP article- Draft:Carolyn Quadrio - and I have been given information that the person has made legal history at least three times prior to 2016. Is there a way I can find out the details using their name? Where would I search and how? Thanks in advance.--[[User:Bcritical|Bcritical]] ([[User talk:Bcritical|talk]]) 05:28, 7 January 2023 (UTC)


==Requesting eyes on [[Big Six (law firms)]]==
::What sort of article were you thinking of? I've just created an Australian version of the American list, based on your list, at [[List of Australian federal legislation]] - feel free to make any changes you want. [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 03:11, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
I need help. When only two users are editing and disagree, it's very hard to resolve disputes. Another editor wants to turn it into an article about another term, "Top tier", and there's only patchy sourcing for that term, anyway. I started an RfC here:
* {{slink|Talk:Big Six (law firms)|RfC: Is the term "top tier" law firms verifiable and in scope here?}}
but I don't think it's going anywhere. The article's only rated "low importance", but I'd still prefer it remain accurate. Perhaps I am wrong ... Any advice appreciated: on improving or publicising the RfC; or just weigh in on the Talk page or article. I'm unlikely to have the energy to keep on it, myself. Thanks. [[User:AukusRuckus|AukusRuckus]] ([[User talk:AukusRuckus|talk]]) 15:34, 27 February 2023 (UTC)


:@[[User:AukusRuckus|AukusRuckus]] dunno if I am any help at all whatsoever here, but ask any corporate lawyer in Victoria and they will know exactly which firms "Big Six" refer to. "Top tier" is used interchangeably however with the Big Six. That said, "Top tier" is also often colloquially used to refer to any very prestigious law firm that is large in size with a high profile client base. Corrs Chambers Westgarth and Gilbert and Tobin are examples of firms most lawyers would consider "top tier" yet are not in the "big six". Either way this is not a hill anyone should wanna die on that's for sure. [[User:MaxnaCarta|MaxnaCarta]] ([[User talk:MaxnaCarta|talk]]) 08:04, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
:::I meant to type article'''s''' - I was wondering if anyone had any ideas about a standard way to structure articles on individual acts. Having a look at the American list, the [[USA PATRIOT Act]] is pretty comprehensive. Perhaps a section each on the history and context of the legislation, the purpose, the effect, and so on. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 05:06, 12 July 2005 (UTC)


== Project-independent quality assessments ==
===Infobox===


Quality assessments are used by Wikipedia editors to rate the quality of articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at [[Wikipedia:Content assessment]], but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent [[WP:Village pump (proposals)/Archive_198#Project-independent_quality_assessments|Village pump proposal]] was approved and has been implemented to add a {{para|class}} parameter to {{tl|WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
{{User:Thebainer/Infobox Legislation | short_title=Australia Act 1986 | parliament=Parliament of Australia | image= | long_title=An Act to bring constitutional arrangements affecting the Commonwealth and the States into conformity with the status of the Commonwealth of Australia as a sovereign, independent and federal nation | introduced_by= | date_passed= | royal_assent=[[December 4]] [[1985]] | commencement=[[March 3]] [[1986]], 05:00 [[UTC]] | amendments=none | related_legislation=none | status=Current}}


No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{tl|WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
In the meantime I made [[User:Thebainer/Infobox Legislation|a quick infobox]] that could be used on pages about individual acts, it covers the basics like what the long title is, when it was given Royal Assent and who introduced it. There's an example below. Any suggestions about adding to it? --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 08:36, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
:Looks fine to me - I can't think of anything more that could be added off the top of my head. [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 12:22, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
::Ok, I've now added the infobox: [[Template:Infobox Legislation]], with instructions and descriptions of the parameters at [[Template talk:Infobox Legislation]]. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 08:45, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
:::Someone apparently didn't like the Aussie-centric naming of the template and moved it to [[Template:Infobox AU Legislation]], in order to restore Americo-centricity. Please update your usage accordingly. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 10:40, 30 July 2005 (UTC)


However, if your project decides to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{tl|WPBannerMeta}} a new {{para|QUALITY_CRITERIA|custom}} parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. [[User:Aymatth2|Aymatth2]] ([[User talk:Aymatth2|talk]]) 14:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
*With respect to legislation - it is continuously being amended with new bills into parliament. Is the template and article going to be a complete incorporation of all the bills introduced that have subsequently amended it? For example the VSU legislation is coming through under the Higher Education Ammendment Act 2002 (or similar) but it is just one paragraph. The template so far looks really good. --[[User:Never29|Never29]] 15:26, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


== Dietrich v The Queen ==
:Yeah, that's the idea, any amendments can be listed in the "Amendments" section in the template. The amendments can then be discussed in detail in the article. At the bottom of the template there's also the {status} parameter, which can be set to "current", "amended" (if there have been substantial amendments) or "repealed". See [[Commonwealth Franchise Act 1902]] for an example. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 21:39, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


High Court of Australia decision [[Dietrich v The Queen]], is currently a Featured Article Candidate. Would very much welcome all AusLaw project members to consider going to the review and providing feedback. All editors welcome to assist in addressing concerns, comments, providing feedback, anything they can. Pinging all recently active editors to the project: @[[User:Longhair|Longhair]], @[[User:Euryalus|Euryalus]], @[[User:MelbourneStar|MelbourneStar]], @[[User:Jack4576|Jack4576]], @[[User:Jabberjaw|Jabberjaw]], @[[User:GA Melbourne|GA Melbourne]], @[[User:Compusolus|Compusolus]], @[[User:Gusfriend|Gusfriend]].
Why repeat what is effectively already up on the free net at [http://www.austlii.edu.au AustLII]? If something is to be done on legislation lets value add to the [http://www.austlii.edu.au AustLII] material. [[User:FedLawyer|FedLawyer]] 15:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

====Ease of use====
I was wondering if the Australian law infobox could be made easier to use or if it is already easy if it could be explained more simply. For example the general {{tl|Infobox Legislation}} shows its fields thus
| Name=
| Parliament/Congress/Senate it was passed in=
| Logo of that parliament or congress=
| longtitle=
| introducedby=
| datepassed=
| datesigned=
| amendments=
| relatedlegislation=
| tablewidth=

A [[List of laws concerning Indigenous Australians]] will probably lead to some new articles. Thanks, [[User:Paul foord|Paul foord]] ([[User talk:Paul foord|talk]]) 02:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

==Featured article workup?==

Over the last few months, we've been having enormous success in the Canberra WikiProject with the concept of a featured article workup - similar to the common collaborations, but not limited by time; it stays there until it gets featured. It's so far managed to produce [[Canberra]] (which was accepted on FAC virtually unanimously) and [[History of the Australian Capital Territory]] (which is very close to being nominated), and I think there could be a lot of potential to do that here - so many of these articles are ordinary, but if a few people were interested, we could produce some real gems. [[Supreme Court of the United States]] is already featured, so perhaps we could take heed from this and make [[High Court of Australia]] even better. [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 07:57, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

:Good idea, and the HCA is a good first candidate. At first glance it's missing a "History" section, which seems pretty glaring. [[WP:SCOTUS]] has their collaboration over at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court Cases/PCA]], although it's been stuck on [[Miranda v. Arizona]] for about a year now. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 08:23, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

:It'd be nice to see HCA worked up to feature standard. [[Australian constitutional law]] is pretty comprehensive as is.--[[User:Cyberjunkie|cj]] | [[User talk:Cyberjunkie|talk]] 08:28, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


==Kick Starting Australian Property Law==
Hey Guys, I would like to write the article on Australian Property Law but thought before I just leaped straight in to ask for some guidance as to style, sub-categorisation, etc given it is such an ecompassing and almost limitless topic.

===For example===
*There is Real Property Law (Land) - mortgages, easements, covenants, leases
*Intellectual Property and its associates; copyright, trademark
*Chattels and the intermingling with torts
*Different state schemes of bureaucratisation
*A long Australian history; and English history indeed - beginning with Feudalism
*Of course Native Title
*Body Corporate & Community Law
*Many theories of property law


I will use the [[Property law]] page as a guide/model however there are some major distinctions as Australian property law is unique to the extent that in the federal system it his highly bureaucratised through legislation, being such a broad topic it could be a nightmare!
===I Propose===
The best way to begin would be to start off with some theory explaining what property is (in terms of a legal right) in the Australian context, then begin by explaining the different state regimes of land title (e.g the Qld Torrens System of Land) but then do you go into history? Quality should be emphasised over quantity, making the focus on land as property then expanding when I've got that one right?

How far does wiki law go? Should it be one big article, or a project encompassing dozens of articles that spring off Property Law? Any pointers? Cheers --[[User:Never29|Never29]] 16:36, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

::I'm very new here, but I would suggest that the property law article should be a launching point for the three main areas of property law in Australia with a brief overview
::*- Real Property (torrens title and native title)
::*- Goods & Chattels (like the english, Denning and such)
::*- Intellectual Property (like the English again, automatic copyright and patents)
::I do not think that Australian property law theory and history deserves it own section on the property law page. It would be worth mentioning the two areas of property law where Australia has really innovated - torrens title and native title. If I learn to edit better I will start working on some of this. IP is more my forte than anything else. [[User:VeryRusty|VeryRusty]] ([[User talk:VeryRusty|talk]]) 12:36, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

== <nowiki>{{LawUnref}}</nowiki> ==

Note - I have created a modification of the <nowiki>{{unreferenced}}</nowiki> template for law articles -
<nowiki>{{LawUnref}}</nowiki>, which puts articles into [[:Category:Law-related articles lacking sources]]. I have substituted this for the regular unref template on some law articles in [[:Category:Articles lacking sources]]. Please use this as a resource to note law-related articles that require references. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|<font style="background:lightgreen">''BD2412''</font>]] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 15:25, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

== Categories for Statutes ==

Some articles about federal and state laws are starting to appear.
I suggest that categories/stubs are created for statues of each of the state parliaments and for the federal parliament. [[User:Johndarrington|jmd]] 03:46, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

There are thousands of pages of the stuff each year - it is like holding back the tide. Categories as suggested are great, but I don't think wiki will ever keep up with the output (or cover what is there) and that is best left for the subject articles anyway. (eg Australian migration law). [[User:FedLawyer|FedLawyer]] 15:15, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

== Judges ==

We now have articles on all of the [[List of Judges of the High Court of Australia|High Court Justices]]. It would be nice to get some articles started on some of the Federal Court or state Supreme Court justices. Anyone know of some good sources for bios on these people? --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 02:04, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
:It'd be nice to get a list on each court article first. Once we've got that, I think we should be able to construct at least some decent biographies between Google and Factiva. [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 02:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
:: a bit hard... NSWSC website only has list (and bio) of the chief justices. there isn't even a list of the other justices. --[[User:Sumple|Sumple]] 13:20, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
::: Eh, we'll find it in time. If one of us can't find it in a law library or state library, then we could always write to them and ask them to point us in the right direction. [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 13:34, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
VICSC has a list all every single judge who has ever served on it [http://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/CA256CC60028922C/page/About+the+Court-History-Judges?OpenDocument&1=10-About+the+Court~&2=70-History~&3=30-Judges~]. [[User:Xtra|Xtra]] 13:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
::::Anyone fancy turning that into a list, ala [[List of Judges of the High Court of Australia]]? There's some people there who'd make for fascinating topics. [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 13:54, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
:::::Done for Vic for current ones. [[User:Xtra|Xtra]] 14:14, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
::::::Lovely. I've formatted all the names according to convention, and I think I'll have to start writing soon. It'd be great if someone could do the full list, although the main article might need a bit of expansion to warrant it. [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 14:39, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Done the complete list. Took a couple of hours. Going to sleep. [[User:Xtra|Xtra]] 05:08, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
:I've disambiguated the list, and added at least the current justices for [[Supreme Court of the Northern Territory]] as an aside. It'd be nice if someone with the appropriate know-how could create a table like that at [[List of Judges of the High Court of Australia]]. [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 06:27, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

== Organising articles ==

I have done some re-organizing along accepted categories for legal writing. Hope you like it ;)!?
Maybe with a more normalised structure people might add smaller articles. I haven't added much article stuff as the big ticket topic items are a bit daunting, so maybe this will help with making some smaller topic items fell like they have somewhere to live.

[[User:FedLawyer|FedLawyer]] 15:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

== Royal Commissions and this project ==

Will this project pick up Royal Commissions, a [[List of Australian Royal Commissions|list]] of national RCs has been created. [[User:Paul foord|Paul foord]] 11:15, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

== [[Interstate Commission]] ==

Added article on inter-state Commission. I need some references (will add soon) and see-alos's. Suggestions? --[[User:Sumple|Sumple]] 13:18, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

== Position of State courts within the court hierarchy - comments sought ==
Various articles about state courts make mention of the court's position within the [[Australian court hierarchy]]. State Supreme Courts are said to me in the middle and District Courts and the [[County Court of Victoria]] for example are said to be low. Could some of the participants in the Aust law project could take a look at some of these as they don't seem right to me. I would have thought it fair to say that the Supreme Courts were near the top, and the district courts (together with the Federal Court) were somewhere near the middle, and the various local courts and Magistrates Courts were at the bottom.
See for example: [[District Court of New South Wales]], [[Supreme Court of Tasmania]], [[District Court of Western Australia]].
Thanks -- [[User:Adz|Adz]]|[[User talk:Adz|talk]] 10:00, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

The current hierarchy:

:High Court is at the Top
:Full federal court is equal to Courts of Appeal
:Federal Court is equal to Supreme Court
:County / Distric Court is a State only thing
:Federal Magistrates is equal to Magistrates/ local

the Supreme courts are right in the middle
and the county/district courts are towards the bottom. [[User:Xtra|Xtra]] 10:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

:: It's hard to say whether a court is in the "middle". If you just write them down as a list, then yeah Supreme Court is in the middle. But in terms of how things are perceived for people, then local court is on the bottom, district/county court is in the middle, and all the appeals courts are up at the top. The High Court is not really a rung on the stepladder because there is no automatic appeal to the High Court. The way I see it:

::*High Court at the "apex"
::*Courts of Appeal (& Full fed court) at the top
::*Supreme Court (fed court) near the top
::*District Court (county court) near the bottom
::*Magistrate's/Local Court at the bottom

::--[[User:Sumple|Sumple]] 23:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

:::Thanks for clarifying that Xtra. I had thought of it much as Sumple has explained it. This perception is probably emphasised by the fact that the majority of cases would be dealt with by local courts and magistrates courts, and only more serious cases would go to a Supreme Court or a Court of appeal - or at least that's my impression as a lay person. Perhaps A disagram of a court hierarchy pyramid in the court hierarchy article would help.
:::I'm begining to think that because the various articles about the courts explain (or should explain) the role of the court and the variuos courts that sit above and below the court in question, adding a sentence about the court hierarchy only confuses things. I think its confusing to say that a particular court is the higest court in the state, and then place it in the middle of the hierarchy. Perhaps it would be suficient to provide a ''"see also"'' link to the Australian Courts Hierarchy article. -- [[User:Adz|Adz]]|[[User talk:Adz|talk]] 23:36, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

My aim in adding the possition in the court hierarchy was really just to get the link to the article which I thought was important. [[User:Xtra|Xtra]] 23:49, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

:I'd just like to point out that a decision of a single High Court judge is not binding on a state Court of Appeal. Neither is a decision of a District/County Court binding on a local/Magistrates Court. Similarly for the Federal Court/Federal Magistrates Court. - [[User:Richardcavell|Richardcavell]] 08:56, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

== Argument going on at [[Gillick competence]] ==

Can anyone who knows what they're talking about answer whether or not a parent and a child can have concurrent ability to consent to medical therapy '''at common law'''? In South Australia and NSW, there's legislation to provide for it. But my argument is that there is no concurrent ability to consent, based on ''Marion's case'' at page 316 (McHugh J) and the majority verdict that appears to construe parental rights more narrowly than ''Gillick'' IMHO. Also, if there's anyone around here who's interested in medical law like me, would you like to get together and referee each other's work? :D - [[User:Richardcavell|Richardcavell]] 09:01, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

==State Supreme Court justices==

A while ago, we added lists of state supreme court justices to those respective court articles, and I've been thinking about starting to write articles on these. I've just been looking for a list of the ACT Supreme Court judges, however, and though I managed to find it ([http://www.courts.act.gov.au/supreme/content/about_us_chronological_index.asp?textonly=no here]), the list is thoroughly confusing. Is there any chance someone could upload this to Wikipedia in a way that makes some sense? [[User:Rebecca|Rebecca]] 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

:I nearly want to kill myself, but it's done: [[List of Judges of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory]]. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 07:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

::You are a legend, bainer. :) [[User:Rebecca|Rebecca]] 06:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[[List of Judges of the Supreme Court of Queensland|Queensland Supreme Court judges]] are added! [[User:Illinoiserocks|Sambo]] 06:06, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

== Constitution template ==

I was checking out {{tl|US Constitution}}, which looks sorta nice, so I thought I'd do up one for the Australian Constitution:
{{User:Thebainer/Constitution of Australia}}
Feel free to edit it before I move it into the template namespace and start adding it to articles. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 11:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

:Good but a lot of the sections are not interesting and wil never elicit an article. Also, s51 may need to be divided into the various subsections. [[User:Xtra|Xtra]] 13:24, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

::Section numbers are pretty user-unfriendly. What about adding some meaningful nomenclature - eg ''Corporations power - s 51(xx)''?

::Yes, I'm picky, but isn't the plural of referendum ''referenda''? [[User:Illinoiserocks|Sambo]] 13:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

:::I used to think so too, but apparently not, see [[Referendum#Terminology]]. Further, "referendums" has always been used in this context (see [http://www.aph.gov.au/library/elect/referend/rintrod.htm this], for example). --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 13:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

:Maybee its time to move it into the the template namespace. And addiing it to relevant pages might encourage users to create articles that are needed. Also maybee a section under SCPOE in this WikiProject, as this seems to be quiet a large selection of articles that will need work. [[User:Jarryd Moore|Jarryd Moore]]

== New member ==
Hi all - I've joined this project, and my first contribution is the [[List of Judges of the Supreme Court of Queensland]]. I'm with Rebecca - I nearly want to kill myself! [[User:Illinoiserocks|Sambo]] 06:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

== Admin law, and more HCA cases ==
There's a notable absence of substantive legal commentary in Wikipedia on Australian immigration law. Given the recent controversies, and that there has been heated division on the High Court (eg in ''Plaintiff S157'') (Gleeson CJ, McHugh J and Kirby J arguably the protagonists) I'm keen to start putting something together. Any volunteers to write some case summaries?

As far as I can see, the notable absences from HC case summaries are:
* Re Judiciary Act 1903 and Naviation Act 1912 [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/29clr257.html (1921) 29 CLR 257]
* Australian Communist Party v Commonwealth [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/83clr1.html (1951) 83 CLR 1]
* AG(Vic); Ex rel Black v Cth [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/146clr559.html (1981) 146 CLR 559]
* Adelaide Company of Jehovah's Witnesses Inc v Cth [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/67clr116.html (1943) 67 CLR 116]
* Church of the New Faith v Cmr Payroll (Vic) [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/154clr120.html (1982) 154 CLR 120]
* AG(UK) v Heinemann Publishers Australia (1987) 8 NSWLR 341
* Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh (1995) 128 ALR 353
* R v Trade Practices Tribunal; Ex parte Tasmanian Breweries [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/123clr361.html (1970) 123 CLR 361]
* AG(NSW) v Trethowan [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/44clr394.html (1931) 44 CLR 394]
* Fardon v AG(Qld) [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2004/46.html [2004] HCA 46]
* Behrooz v Secretary of DIMIA [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2004/36.html [2004] HCA 36]
* Al-Kateb v Godwin [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2004/37.html [2004] HCA 37]
* Singh v Commonwealth of Australia [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2004/43.html [2004] HCA 43]
* Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Applicant S154/2002 [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2003/60.html [2003] HCA 60]
* Plaintiff S157 v Cth [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2003/2.html [2003] HCA 2]
* Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Singh [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2002/7.html [2002] HCA 7]
* Re Wakim [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1999/27.html [1999] HCA 27]
* Perre v Apand
* Garcia v National Australia Bank
[[User:Illinoiserocks|Sambo]] 08:56, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

:I'll be happy to help with some of those, ''Al-Kateb'' particularly, and also the ''Jehovah's Witnesses case''. Unfortunately it's exams at the moment for me, and for several other members of the project so I may not be able to help straight away! ''[[Dietrich v The Queen]]'' seems to be fairly well accepted as our model case law article, so check that out when you start working on these cases. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 12:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

::S220/2002 is another important high court immigration case (for admin law anyway)... ([[User:JROBBO|JROBBO]] 07:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC))

== [[Australian tort law]] ==
This article is badly in need of editing and meaningful commentary. I've started by adding some references and editing/adding to (in part) the sections on legislative reform and recognised torts. [[User:Illinoiserocks|Sambo]] 12:06, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

== High Court Judges ==

Can we put the birth (and death if relevant) dates of the High Court judges on the list? I think it would make a useful addition to that list? If I recall they were on there for some time but were later removed. ([[User:JROBBO|JROBBO]] 07:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC))

:What for? [[User:Rebecca|Rebecca]] 10:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

::I'm with JROBBO - this would be a useful addition. [[User:Illinoiserocks|Sambo]] 12:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

== Spycatcher Case ==

Can we add a page for the ''[[Spycatcher]]'' case (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1988/25.html Attorney-General (United Kingdom) v Heinemann Publishers Australia Pty Ltd [1988] HCA 25] - the case about the publication of alleged MI6 secrets in Australia and the UK Government's attempt to restrain publication of the book in Austalia - rejected on the grounds of the assertion of sovereign authority by a foreign state in Australia. This is an important High Court case in Australia. ([[User:JROBBO|JROBBO]] 03:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC))

:That certainly looks interesting! I'll do some research. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 05:00, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

== New citation template ==

I've done up a new single citation template which can link to more than two dozen different case report and transcript sources at AustLII. The template is currently [[User:Thebainer/cite case|here]], tests seem to work fine so far, so I'll move it into the template namespace and start deprecating the old citation templates if people think it's useful. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 12:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

:Absolutely - that's a great idea. [[User:Illinoiserocks|Sambo]] 16:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

::Finally got around to doing this, {{tl|Cite Case AU}} is now available to use, it replaces the old citation templates, which I've deprecated from main space. It can also easily link to about two dozen more sources on the AustLII site, including various federal courts, the state and territory Supreme Courts and even some tribunals. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 13:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

== Thomas McCosker ==
[[Thomas McCosker]] is currently at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas McCosker|AfD]]. The person is not really notable but the Fijian court case is. Would somebody like to have a go at turning it into an article about the court case? There is some support for a rename. I have now found the Fijian law report at http://www.paclii.org/fj/cases/FJHC/2005/500.html. There are some articles on the Fijian judicial system and the constitution but there could be more.--[[User:AYArktos|A Y Arktos]]\<sup>[[User_talk:AYArktos|talk]]</sup> 21:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

==[[Allens Arthur Robinson]]==

We don't currently have an article on this firm who by my reckoning is one of Australia's leading law firms. How do you add an article to a requested articles list. This is in relation to [[Norman Lethbridge Cowper]] who is currently nominated in Articles for deletion and who was senior partner in the firm when it was Allen, Allen & Helmsley. [[User:Capitalistroadster|Capitalistroadster]] 10:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

== [[Constitution of Australia]] ==

Hey guys, I am attempting a re-write of the [[Constitution of Australia]] article. Basically, the reasons that I feel this article needs work is because:
* The current article is too much like [[Australian constitutional law]].
* I think the [[Constitution of Australia]] should be a short, descriptive outline about the document, and less so about doctrines or cases; more descriptive and less discursive.
* When someone reads the [[Constitution of Australia]] article as it stands, they're likely to be left without very clear ideas about the nature/history/structure/contents of the documents.
What I've done so far is at [[User:Sumple/Constitution of Australia]]. The #Articles section is based on the [[United States Constitution]] article.

Things which still need to be done are:
* A "History" section.
* Work out a good way of explaining the relationship between the Constitution text, vs the "Constitution" including letters patent or other things.
* I would also like to restructure the "See Also" section in such a way as to bring together all the Constitution-related articles on Wikipedia (cases excluded - they can be linked from [[Australian constitutional law]]).
* There is some material from the original page down the bottom, under "Old Stuff". They're there just for reference.
Any comments, suggestions, and criticisms are most welcome. --[[User:Sumple|Sumple]] ([[User_Talk:Sumple|Talk]]) 01:12, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

:I agree completely with your approach: the article should focus on describing the constitution itself, not constitutional law. Your rewrite so far is brilliant, and, insofar as I can see, covers everything it need do. The only thing it really requires is a bit more meat :). Great job, --[[User:Cyberjunkie|cj]] | [[User talk:Cyberjunkie|talk]] 05:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

::Yes, it looks good, and I agree that it should focus mainly on the document (with summary sections for the history and law articles, which you have). I was working on a template ([[User:Thebainer/Constitution of Australia]]) a while ago with links to various articles on the subject, I was planning to do articles on each of the chapters and on some of the more significant sections, I imagined those as being the main articles on smaller sections on this article. That would tie in nicely with this structure. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 05:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

::: Thanks cj and bainer for the encouragement. That template looks great. It would link all the Constitutional law articles together in a logical and coherent way. Great idea. --[[User:Sumple|Sumple]] ([[User_Talk:Sumple|Talk]]) 10:10, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

How's this coming along?--[[User:Cyberjunkie|cj]] | [[User talk:Cyberjunkie|talk]] 05:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

: I've (finally) got the History section written - see [[User:Sumple/Constitution of Australia]]. I'm sure it has much room to improve, but I propose to replace the old version soon (which will make it easier to edit by all interested parties). If there are no objections, I will do it in a week. Please post any objections, comments, or suggestions at [[Talk:Constitution of Australia#New version - any_objections]]. --[[User:Sumple|Sumple]] ([[User_Talk:Sumple|Talk]]) 06:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

== Tort Law cleanup ==

Hey, just did a cleanup of the [[Australian tort law]] article - need feedback. [[User:MojoTas|MojoTas]] 03:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

== [[Lex Lasry]] ==
I was surprised to discover that there wasn't an article about Lex Lasry, so I created one. It didn't seem to fit within the scope of the list of tasks for this project so I haven't added it, but I thought that participants of this project might be interested to know that it has been created and may want to add content and/or clean it up a bit. Cheers. -- [[User:Adz|Adz]]|[[User talk:Adz|talk]] 12:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

== How do i sign up? ==

do i just add my name to the list?

p.s wait till spring semester is over, i'll go crazy on these articles. ([[User:Truth 06|Truth 06]] 14:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC))

Just add your name to the list. It's that simple! Great to have you on board, motivated for the challenges ahead! Cheers and happy editing! [[User:Jpeob|Jpe]]|[[User talk:Jpeob|ob]] 14:58, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

== Project directory ==

Hello. The [[WP:COUNCIL|WikiProject Council]] has recently updated the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory]]. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at [[User:B2T2/Portal]], listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding [[:Category:WikiProject assessments|assessment]], [[:Category:WikiProject peer reviews|peer review]], and [[:Category:Wikipedia collaborations|collaboration]] are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. [[User:Badbilltucker2|B2T2]] 22:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

== Family Trusts ==

Could some people interested in Australian law come and help out at this discussion: [[Talk:Trust law#Family Trusts (Australia)]]?

== Nulyarimma v Thompson ==

I just created this article [[Nulyarimma v Thompson]]. I'm a wikipedia n00b so it probably has some faults, fix it if you can :). Cheers {[[User:Truth 06|Truth 06]] 12:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)}

== case significance ==

how significant does a case have to be before we can create an article about it? {[[User:Truth 06|Truth 06]] 11:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)}

:It is a bit like asking how long is a piece of string! But I would have thought significant HCA or state Court of Appeal cases should get priority unless there is some really novel point raised in a lower court's decision. [[User:Illinoiserocks|Sambo]] 12:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

::Most of the existing case articles are about High Court cases, since they are usually the ones which are most important. But that's just been a trend in our work - there are no rules about what sort of case you can write about. I myself have written mostly about High Court cases, with the occasional [[Ruddock v Vadarlis|Federal Court case]] or [[R v Davidson|state supreme court case]].
::Essentially, it's up to you, and we're happy to have whatever articles you want to write. Take a look at ''[[Al-Kateb v Godwin]]'' and ''[[Dietrich v The Queen]]'', both [[WP:FA|featured articles]], for some pointers on style and structure, if you haven't seen them already. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 13:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

:::: Cheers {[[User:Truth 06|Truth 06]] 03:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)}

== Stablepedia ==

''Beginning cross-post.''
:See [[Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia]]. If you wish to comment, please comment there. [[User:Messedrocker|<font color="red">★<small>MESSED</small></font>]][[User talk:Messedrocker|<font color="red"><small>ROCKER</small>★</font>]] 03:26, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
''End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.''

== Use of succession boxes for High Court Justices ==

I am curious to get the opinion of those reading on the matter of using succession boxes for Justices of the High Court of Australia. If we were to follow the American model, a justice would have a succession box listing the person to have occupied his or her seat on the court right back to that seat’s establishment. I assume this can be done by following the chart that it laid out of the [[List of Justices of the High Court of Australia]].

Assuming this is acceptable, a succession box might look something like this for [[Frank Kitto|Sir Frank Kitto]]:

{{start box}}
{{s-legal}}
{{succession box | title=[[List of Justices of the High Court of Australia| Justice of the High Court of Australia]]| before=[[George Rich|Sir George Rich]] | after=[[Harry Gibbs|Sir Harry Gibbs]] | years=1950-1970}}
{{s-aca}}
{{succession box | title=[[List of University of New England (Australia) people|
Chancellor of the University of New England]] | before=[[Phillip Wright (pastoralist)|Phillip Wright]] | after=[[Rob Robertson-Cuninghame]] | years=1970-1981}}
{{end box}}

Is this an appropriate method of listing the succession from one justice to another? Would adding such a succession box to each and every justice of the High Court add or detract from the page? Any feedback would be appreciated! - [[User:Kiwifruitboi|Kiwifruitboi]] 07:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

:I think it certainly can't hurt - I for one would find it useful. [[User:Rebecca|Rebecca]] 04:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

== Case of Mines aka R v Earl of Northumberland ==
Could somebody please look at a stub I created on [[Case of Mines]]. It is a 1568 case which was the legal precedent for the issuing of [[Miner's Licence]]s (ie those things they were rebelling against at [[Eureka Stockade]]).

There is a citation ''(1568) 1 Plowd., 310, at pp. 336, 336a.'' given at http://www.brumbywatchaustralia.com/Principality18.htm <blockquote>Mines Case4(1568) 1 Plowd., 310, at pp. 336, 336a. all the Justices and Barons agreed that, in the case of the baser metals, no prerogative is given to the Crown; whereas all mines of gold and silver within the realm, whether they be in the lands of the Queen, or of subjects, belong to the Queen by prerogative, with liberty to dig and carry away the ores thereof, and with other such incidents thereto as are necessary to be used for the getting of the ore.</blockquote>

I feel a case which is such an important precedent for how mining was managed in colonies across the British Empire (Aust, NZ and Canada) needs at the least a decent stub. I am really not sure how to usefully progress a case law article from the sixteenth century.--[[User:Golden Wattle|Golden Wattle ]] <sup>[[User_talk:Golden Wattle|talk]]</sup> 21:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

:The case is cited as ''The Case of Mines (1568) 1 Plowd 310; 75 ER 472.'' in [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/journals/AILR/1997/28.html?query=%22case%20of%20mines%22%201568#fn281 an article in the Indigenous Law Reporter; ''Asking The Minerals Question: Rights In Minerals As An Incident of Native Title''] --[[User:Golden Wattle|Golden Wattle ]] <sup>[[User_talk:Golden Wattle|talk]]</sup> 21:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

== Wikipedia Day Awards ==

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of [[Wikipedia:Esperanza|Esperanza's]] proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at [[User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week]] where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. [[User:Badbilltucker|Badbilltucker]] 23:23, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

==[[Palm Island, Queensland|Palm Island]] [[WP:ACOTF|ACOTF]]==

Hi Wikipedians, as you might already know the Palm Island article has just become the [[Wikipedia:Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight|Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight]]. To bring this article up to scratch we need your help in the following areas: "Manburra People v GBRMPA", "Zen Pearls Pty Ltd" and "Aboriginals Protection and Restrictions of the Sale of Opium Act 1897". Also the recently implemented Alcohol Management Plan [http://www.liquor.qld.gov.au/Indigenous/Alcohol+Management+Plans/Palm+Island] for the Island may be of interest.

However of highest interest to members of this project I'm sure is the [[jurisprudence]] questions raised by recent events where the Coroner investigating a death in custody allocated the blame for the death to a police officer and then the Queensland Director of Public Prosecutions made an affirmative statement that the death was actually caused by an accidental fall and not the police officer. More recently the Queensland Government has asked (former NSW Justice) Sir Lawrence Street to provide a second opinion based on the DPP's own file. This will be an interesting project/article to get involved in I guarantee! [[User:WikiTownsvillian |Wiki]][[User talk:WikiTownsvillian|Townsvillia]][[Special:Contributions/WikiTownsvillian|n]] 08:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
:In particular, there is a section /*Aboriginal Protection and restriction of the sale of opium act 1897 which is bigger than the main article to which it refers ([[Aboriginal Protection and restriction of the sale of opium act 1897]]). If a contributor could review that section, move relevant content to the main article, and place only a summary back on [[Palm Island, Queensland|Palm Island]], that would be a great assistance to the [[ACOTF]].[[User:GarrieIrons|Ga]][[User_talk:GarrieIrons|rr]][[Special:Contributions/GarrieIrons|ie]] 04:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

== High Court Judges List ==

I've done a bit of work on [[List of Justices of the High Court of Australia]]; I think this could easily be a featured list - besides references, which are quite easy to come by, and an opening that's a bit more detailed, I don't think much work needs to be done on it. If anyone can make any suggestions on the article and how it might be improved, please reply to this message. [[User:JRG|JRG]] 11:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

==Anyone out there?==
It's now almost a month since I posted the above. Any chance of a reply? Does anyone read this page any more? [[User:JRG|JRG]] 22:56, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

==Floating charges==
In Getzler & Payne, ''Company Charges - Spectrum & Beyond'' it is claimed in the foreword that the [[floating charge]] has been abolished in both Australia and New Zealand. One of the authors (Josh Getzler) is an Aussie, so I suppose he ought to know, but the claim is actually made in the foreword by Lord Millett. Can anyone confirm if this is right and point me in the direction of any relevant statute? If it is corrected, then the floating charge article should be updated to mention this. --'''[[User:Legis|Legis]]''' <small>([[User talk:Legis|talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Legis|contributions]])</small> 16:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

:I've no idea where he gets that from. Floating charges have definitely not been abolished in Australia - at least not in Victoria - unless there's something I missed in the last month or so. The position may have been modified by statute in other states (particularly the all-Torrens states) but even so, it wouldn't be correct to say that the floating charge has been abolished altogether. When was the book written? --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 01:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

::It is copyrighted from 2006. I suspect it is an inaccurate throw-away comment. He also says that they have no concept of a floating charge in the U.S., which might be technically true, but they do have a concept of a floating lien, which is conceptually on all fours. I guess they let anyone sit in the House of Lords these day. --'''[[User:Legis|Legis]]''' <small>([[User talk:Legis|talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Legis|contributions]])</small> 08:13, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

== Interwiki Cooperation ==

I've asked for an "interwiki cooperation". Please read the discussion [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law#Interwiki Cooperation|here]]. Thanks. [[User:Erasoft24|Erasoft24]] 23:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

== logo ==

I came across this from a stub notice without any kind of logo for Australian law, I dont know how to make it, but I think a good logo for Australian law stub notices (by stub notice I mean the things that say "This article relating to Australian Law is a stub..." would be the scales of justice over a map of Australia.[[User:Crd721|Crd721]] 07:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

== Wikinews item on [[Susan Kiefel]] ==

A stub news item [http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Kiefel_appointed_to_High_Court_of_Australia Kiefel appointed to High Court of Australia] is being developed at Wikinews for publication on the day of Kiefel's swearing in. Any contributions are welcome to get it to the standard required to be featured as a headline on the main page. <span style="border:1px solid #800000;">[[User:Dbromage|<font style="color:#C0C0C0;background:#800000;"><b>Dbromage</b></font>]][[User_talk: Dbromage|<font style="color:#C0C0C0;background:#800000;">&nbsp;[Talk]</font>]]</span> 07:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

== Help with AWA page ==

Hi, I've been trying to edit the page on [[Australian Workplace Agreement]] to get it to NPOV, at the moment nobody is interested in adding anything unless I remove the tag "the neutrality of this article is disputed" and then all of a sudden people have an opinion. If anyone here would like to have a quick look at the legal side of the it that would help heaps. [[User:Master z0b|Master z0b]] 00:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

== re [[Court of Appeals]] ==

Please see my move proposal at [[Talk:Court of Appeals#Rename this article?]]. --[[User:Mathew5000|Mathew5000]] 19:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

==Duplication of Categories==
I found an anomaly. There may be more to discover, but any-way I found these two; Category:Australian_constitutional_law and also Category:Australian constitutional law, which appear to be two distinct categories, so I added the first to a couple of articles so they have both, which hopefully might elicit either someone who knows what's going on to edit all the pages in both categories to a common category with agreed syntax so that only one category is in use, or might elicit a debate over the proper syntax to be applied for categories within the scope of this and related projects. [[User:Petedavo|petedavo]] ([[User talk:Petedavo|talk]]) 23:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

==County Court of Victoria==
I've added a list of judges to this page, and will try and get a few pages for individual judges up. Suggestions are welcome. [[User:Donners|Donners]] ([[User talk:Donners|talk]]) 22:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

== Anyone know about [[Blake Dawson]]? ==

It is missing an article (see redlink in [[Big Six law firms]]). --[[User:PalaceGuard008|PalaceGuard008]] ([[User_Talk:PalaceGuard008|Talk]]) 14:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

== High Court judge photos— URGENT ==

I know some people who read here have fought against Australian politician photos being deleted before— I was wondering if you wouldn't mind commenting on [[Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2008_May_20#Image:Justice_Hayne.jpg|this deletion discussion]] for the photo of Justice Hayne on the High Court— deletion of this photo will mean that all photos of judges in Australia except those where the photo is in public domain (which means every judge since the 1950s/60s, essentially) will have to be deleted, except for Spigelman's picture which was provided by a family friend and Kirby (who is a major exception due to his other commitments). I don't think some users understand that it is practically impossible to get a photo of an Australian judge— we are not going to get free photos in a million years. Feel free to let others know and get them to comment too. [[User:JRG|JRG]] ([[User talk:JRG|talk]]) 05:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
:I will respond. There's good reason for keeping these - I agree. [[User:Lonelygirl16|Lonelygirl16]] ([[User talk:Lonelygirl16|talk]]) 14:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

== Wikiproject Prisons ==
If anyone's interested, I've proposed a new wikiproject for the creation of articles regarding specific prisons [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Wikiproject_Prisons|here]]. --[[User:Cdogsimmons|Cdogsimmons]] ([[User talk:Cdogsimmons|talk]]) 20:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

== Burger King legal issues ==

Burger King Corporation v. Hungry Jack's Pty Limited ([[Case citation|[2001] NSWCA 187]])

I need some help with this case over at [[Burger King legal issues]]. This article is currently is a Feature Article candidate and I would like some help insuring that the article is factually correct. Could any of the members of Australian Law project assist with this? I also need help making sure all case citations are properly noted per the standards of the Australian legal system.

Thank you very much, --[[User:Jerem43|Jeremy]] (<small> [[User Talk:Jerem43|Blah blah...]]</small>) 07:03, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

== Legislation citation template ==

To go with the [[Template:Cite Case AU|case citation template]] I've created a legislation citation template, {{tl|Cite Legislation AU}}. Like the case template, it produces links to the [[AustLII]] site. Of the resources available there, it currently supports consolidated acts and regulations (which are available for every Australian jurisdiction) and, where available, bills and explanatory memoranda, as well as repealed acts and regulations, which are available for only the ACT and NSW.

It's somewhat less useful than the case citation template, since you need to know the short name that AustLII gives to each piece of legislation that they use in the URL. However, it should still be useful for consistency (and for ease of updating in case MULR puts out a new edition of the AGLC) and for any possible template-data-mining tools that might be created. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 11:41, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

== High Court Judges ==

I recently saw this page ([[List_of_Justices_of_the_High_Court_of_Australia]]). Could this have references added? It could be a good article. [[User:Lonelygirl16|Lonelygirl16]] ([[User talk:Lonelygirl16|talk]]) 07:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

==Changes needed to Australian Monarchy articles==
Does someone want to look at [[List of Australian monarchs]]? --[[User:Lawe|Lawe]] ([[User talk:Lawe|talk]]) 06:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

== Coordinators' working group ==



Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Coordinators' working group|WikiProject coordinators' working group]], an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. &mdash; <small>Delievered by [[User:ShepBot|<font color="green">'''§hepBot'''</font>]]'''&nbsp;<small>([[User talk:ShepBot|<font color="red">Disable</font>]])</small>''' on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 04:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)</small>

==[[Wikipedia:Article alerts|Article alerts]]==

This is a notice to let you know about '''''[[Wikipedia:Article alerts|Article alerts]]''''', a [[WP:BOTS|fully-automated]] subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|Articles for deletion]], [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment|Requests for comment]], [[Wikipedia:Peer review|Peer review]] and other workflows ([[Wikipedia:Article alerts#Workflows covered|full list]]). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found [[Wikipedia:Article alerts#Samples|here]].

If you are already subscribed to ''Article Alerts'', it is now easier to [[Wikipedia talk:Article alerts/Bugs|report bugs]] and [[Wikipedia talk:Article alerts/Feature requests|request new features]]. We are also in the process of implementing a [[Wikipedia talk:Article alerts/News|"news system"]], which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the <code>display=none</code> parameter, but forget to '''give a link''' to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at [[Wikipedia talk:Article alerts]].<!--Addbot-WP-Message-Article-alerts-01-->

<small>Message sent by [[User:Addbot]] to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome [[User_talk:Addbot|here]].</small>

Thanks. — [[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]]&nbsp;{<sup>[[User talk:Headbomb|ταλκ]]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-4.0ex;">[[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|κοντριβς]]</sub>&nbsp;&ndash;&nbsp;[[WP:PHYS|WP Physics]]} 08:49, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

== WP:NOT#PLOT ==

{{fmbox|
style=background: #ECF6FF; border-left: 1em solid #51A7F4;|
text='''WP:NOT#PLOT:''' There is an [[Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#RFC|RfC]] discussing if our policy on plot, WP:PLOT, should be removed from [[WP:NOT| what Wikipedia is not]]. Please feel free to comment on the discussion and straw poll. |
}}

Apologies for the notice, but this is being posted to every WikiProject to avoid accusations of systemic bias. [[User:Hiding|Hiding]] <small>[[User talk:Hiding|T]] </small> 13:29, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

==Law notability guideline==
You are invited to comment on the preliminary [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law/notability|law notability guideline]]. Criticism, comments, better ways of phrasing things - even suggestions of other things it should cover - are welcome. Thanks, [[User:Ironholds|Ironholds]] ([[User talk:Ironholds|talk]]) 02:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

== Categorisation ==

Folks, assuming anyone is out there.

It seems like the categorisation of articles is a bit hit and miss at the moment. We seem to have a lot of subcategories, some of them very specific, as well as some which appear to be duplicates. I would like to suggest that we attempt to consolidate and structure the current pages in a slightly new way.

My suggestion is:
:A subcategory for each of the major areas of law. For example, the subcategory property law would contain subcategories for real property, IP, and native title, at least.
:A category for people and structures supporting the legal system. This is where all the judges, courts, firms, journals, etc. would reside.
:A category for legislation.

I'm not even sure that we need a category for legislation. Individual cases would belong to the area of law(s) for which they are notable.

Any comments please.[[User:VeryRusty|VeryRusty]] ([[User talk:VeryRusty|talk]]) 11:17, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

:We actually have quite a few of these already. Check out the subcategories under [[:Category:Australian law]]. [[:Category:Australian legislation]] already exists, as do quite a few categories on areas of law (such as [[:Category:Australian property law]] and [[:Category:Australian constitutional law]]). I see you've created the [[:Category:People in Australian law|People in Australian law]] category which is a good addition! The judges category that's now under that is looking pretty good, but law firms are definitely an area in need of expansion.
:Are there any other changes you've thought of? --[[User:Stephen Bain|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Stephen Bain|talk]]) 08:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

== [[Acts Interpretation Act 1901]] ==

I have expanded [[Acts Interpretation Act 1901]] and added references. Perhaps someone could review? [[User:Otherthinker|Otherthinker]] ([[User talk:Otherthinker|talk]]) 21:01, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
: I've had a look, and it looks good, has a lot of the basic info. It would be good to see some more info about its use in practice (such as for judicial interpretation) and any major amendments, and cases which turned on it's provisions. I've upgraded its class to start.[[User:VeryRusty|VeryRusty]] ([[User talk:VeryRusty|talk]]) 22:10, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

== New article someone might want to look at ==

Hi all, I was doing new pages patrolling and came across this article: [[Latec Investments v Hotel Terrigal (in liq) (1965) 113 CLR 265, High Court of Australia]]. At present it's written essentially like someone's case brief rather than an encyclopedic discussion of the case itself (and has other problems, such as probably requiring a rename). That and I don't even know if we could call it notable (not familiar enough with Australian law myself). —/[[User:Mendaliv|'''M'''<small>endaliv</small>]]/<sup><small>[[User talk:Mendaliv|2¢]]</small></sup>/<sub><small>[[Special:Contributions/Mendaliv|Δ's]]</small></sub>/ 17:13, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

== error message ==

Does anyone know why the bottom of [[wp:WikiProject Australian law]] says:
"Cite error: There are < ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a <nowiki>{{reflist}}</nowiki> template (see the help page)"? X[[User:Ottawahitech|Ottawahitech]] ([[User talk:Ottawahitech|talk]]) 16:15, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
:Fixed [[User:Wikiain|Wikiain]] ([[User talk:Wikiain|talk]]) 22:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

== clarification for [[Carmen Rupe]] ==

In [[Carmen Rupe]] it says:
:She described how local police treated her: I was locked up in Long Bay prison about a dozen times. But it made me a stronger person today.[4] An arrest in New Zealand failed to produce a conviction, because drag was legal there, unlike Australia.
That's definitely supported by the sources given, but the sources are Rupe-specific. Does anyone know of a good legal source for whether drag was actually illegal in Australia (in the 1950s-60s-70s) and when it stopped being a crime? [[User:Stuartyeates|Stuartyeates]] ([[User talk:Stuartyeates|talk]]) 10:27, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

== Expert attention ==

This is a notice about [[:Category:Australian law articles needing expert attention]], which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated.<!-- Template:Expert-category-notice --> [[User:Iceblock|Iceblock]] ([[User talk:Iceblock#top|talk]]) 23:25, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

==[[Codelfa Construction v State Rail Authority of New South Wales]]==
Hi folks. I've created the above page and would love some feedback from editors in the law community. If anyone has recommendations for where to look for this, or whether this group might be interested in reviewing my page, please let me know. Thanks so much!--[[User:Bofn8828|Bofn8828]] ([[User talk:Bofn8828|talk]]) 23:11, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
:I'll have a look {{ping|Bofn8828}}. I have moved the page to add "Pty Ltd" to the name and will tidy up some of the references, but it is a good start. [[User:Find bruce|Find bruce]] ([[User talk:Find bruce|talk]]) 00:46, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your help! I really struggled with adhering to the citation style for cases as a first time user. You have greatly improved the quality of the page [[User:Find bruce|Find bruce]]--[[User:Bofn8828|Bofn8828]] ([[User talk:Bofn8828|talk]])
:Yes I found the citations a bit tricky at first but once you get your head around the [[Template:cite AustLII|cite AustLII template]] it is pretty easy. In terms of the article content, a couple of suggestions for improvement. The decision section is usually limited to what the High Court actually decided. Commentary & discussion as to the rationale & comparisons with English law would then be in the next section. This is one of the most cited Australian cases (see {{url|www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=1982+HCA+24|LawCite}}) and for the most part uncontroversial, but academic papers, quite understandably, focus on the areas of controversy. It seems to me the article is focused a little too much on both the areas of controversy and the comparison with English law. On that note, Codelfa in 1982 can't have diverged from the English position in 1997. My recollection was that the English position has changed over time but the High Court declined to do so. These are minor points and you are under no obligation to agree with them & like I said the article is a good start. [[User:Find bruce|Find bruce]] ([[User talk:Find bruce|talk]]) 21:21, 31 October 2018 (UTC)


Would especially be grateful for any assistance in providing feedback on whether the article is comprehensible to the casual reader, or if not, assisting with ideas on how to improve. Also need source integrity checking. Any assistance appreciated. This article was one of the projects only featured articles and after its delisting I have spent 14 months trying to get it back. Cheers — [[User:MaxnaCarta|<span style="color:#AA9977">MaxnaCarta&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;(&nbsp;[[User talk:MaxnaCarta|💬]]&nbsp;•&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/MaxnaCarta|📝]]&nbsp;) 06:47, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
== Request for information on WP1.0 web tool ==


== Discussion of s.68 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act ==
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the [[User:WP_1.0_bot|WP 1.0 Bot]]! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the [[:toolforge:enwp10/cgi-bin/pindex.fcgi|web tool]] that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.


[[File:Information.svg|left|30x30px]]
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScK30kJtKQ3cp-QLY1VJhB94HP2q6437Cdk3E2rVRYHowcL4A/viewform?usp=sf_link this Google form] where you can leave your response. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
There is a discussion at [[Talk:Australian Defence Force#Role of the Governor General]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. [[User:Melbguy05|Melbguy05]] ([[User talk:Melbguy05|talk]]) 10:45, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:JJMC89@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/ListOfProjects&oldid=923068486 -->

Latest revision as of 10:45, 8 August 2024

Codelfa Construction v State Rail Authority of New South Wales

[edit]

Hi folks. I've created the above page and would love some feedback from editors in the law community. If anyone has recommendations for where to look for this, or whether this group might be interested in reviewing my page, please let me know. Thanks so much!--Bofn8828 (talk) 23:11, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look @Bofn8828:. I have moved the page to add "Pty Ltd" to the name and will tidy up some of the references, but it is a good start. Find bruce (talk) 00:46, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your help! I really struggled with adhering to the citation style for cases as a first time user. You have greatly improved the quality of the page Find bruce--Bofn8828 (talk)

Yes I found the citations a bit tricky at first but once you get your head around the cite AustLII template it is pretty easy. In terms of the article content, a couple of suggestions for improvement. The decision section is usually limited to what the High Court actually decided. Commentary & discussion as to the rationale & comparisons with English law would then be in the next section. This is one of the most cited Australian cases (see lawcite) and for the most part uncontroversial, but academic papers, quite understandably, focus on the areas of controversy. It seems to me the article is focused a little too much on both the areas of controversy and the comparison with English law. On that note, Codelfa in 1982 can't have diverged from the English position in 1997. My recollection was that the English position has changed over time but the High Court declined to do so. These are minor points and you are under no obligation to agree with them & like I said the article is a good start. Find bruce (talk) 21:21, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How active is this project?

[edit]

Hi - I have been responsible for most of the recent activity in AL’s sister project, WP Australian crime (in occasional bursts), though apart from that, that project is probably a candidate for an "inactive" tag. Was wondering about that here... I did a few housekeeping edits today (feel free to let me know if something wasn't quite right and I'll rectify) but was wondering if anyone or anything is still active here? Thanks. JabberJaw (talk) 02:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Australian sub projects are all 'live' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/ on close examination - an in most cases the notion of activity is as to whether there are any processes conducted - usually against the log process such as:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Perh articles by quality log

Where assessment or changes in assessment are indicators - and each Australian project has varying degrees of intensity as to where participants in some projects are adequately active in keeping up with that project.

Another project component is the presence of any activity at the talk page of the project. Or in people adding themselves as participants.

In most cases querying whether a project is active or not is counter productive. Just edit and get on with it, making sure you get over your lack of assessing - and the project is definitily alive. Asking the question doesnt help, editing alway does. JarrahTree 10:21, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox court case: Substituting 'opinion' with 'judgment'

[edit]

I have added a suggestion on the talk page of the above template that it be amended so that a different term for 'opinions' can be included. Opinions does not seem correct in an Australian context - it is not in common usage, judgments is the term used. Added here in case anyone wants to chime in over there. Local Variable (talk) 16:04, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Big Six (law firms) recent changes

[edit]

There have recently been a lot of changes on the Big Six (law firms) article. I am hoping some experienced Wikipedian who is interested in Australian law topics can look at them, as it's beyond my ability to follow.

My concern is that two editors (or maybe one user with two names) are turning the article into something it is not intended to be. It appears to be morphing into an article about current prominent law firms, whereas I think the article is meant to be about the term Big Six itself, and its earlier use for the 'top' law firms in Australia. I have put my concerns on talk, and also on the users' talk pages, 1 and 2. Now it's getting way too confusing for me.

If there's someone active here, maybe Local Variable, for instance, could they take a look, please? Apologies if this is not the appropriate place to ask, but some of the boards I looked at seem too extreme, as I am uncertain of the seriousness of the problem, or even if it is a problem. Also, mildly concerned if there could be a touch of conflict of interest? ... Just that they only edit Law Firm articles, but that may be only because they're new. Please ignore this, if inappropriate. Thank you 49.177.64.138 (talk) 14:51, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@49.177.64.138: Thanks for drawing my attention to this article. I will have a look at those edits, and make any edits I think are needed to maintain the WP:NPOV and WP:NOPROMO policies. I am slightly concerned that there is sockpuppetry involved between those users, based on similarity of edit summaries and edit history. Opening a case at WP:SPI may be warranted. Local Variable (talk) 15:09, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the meantime, I have placed a notice on the talk page of each user advising of the one account policy. If suspicious editing continues on both accounts, I'll look at further options like SPI. Local Variable (talk) 15:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I hope this is the right place to ask. I am writing a WP article- Draft:Carolyn Quadrio - and I have been given information that the person has made legal history at least three times prior to 2016. Is there a way I can find out the details using their name? Where would I search and how? Thanks in advance.--Bcritical (talk) 05:28, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting eyes on Big Six (law firms)

[edit]

I need help. When only two users are editing and disagree, it's very hard to resolve disputes. Another editor wants to turn it into an article about another term, "Top tier", and there's only patchy sourcing for that term, anyway. I started an RfC here:

but I don't think it's going anywhere. The article's only rated "low importance", but I'd still prefer it remain accurate. Perhaps I am wrong ... Any advice appreciated: on improving or publicising the RfC; or just weigh in on the Talk page or article. I'm unlikely to have the energy to keep on it, myself. Thanks. AukusRuckus (talk) 15:34, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AukusRuckus dunno if I am any help at all whatsoever here, but ask any corporate lawyer in Victoria and they will know exactly which firms "Big Six" refer to. "Top tier" is used interchangeably however with the Big Six. That said, "Top tier" is also often colloquially used to refer to any very prestigious law firm that is large in size with a high profile client base. Corrs Chambers Westgarth and Gilbert and Tobin are examples of firms most lawyers would consider "top tier" yet are not in the "big six". Either way this is not a hill anyone should wanna die on that's for sure. MaxnaCarta (talk) 08:04, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Project-independent quality assessments

[edit]

Quality assessments are used by Wikipedia editors to rate the quality of articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project decides to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dietrich v The Queen

[edit]

High Court of Australia decision Dietrich v The Queen, is currently a Featured Article Candidate. Would very much welcome all AusLaw project members to consider going to the review and providing feedback. All editors welcome to assist in addressing concerns, comments, providing feedback, anything they can. Pinging all recently active editors to the project: @Longhair, @Euryalus, @MelbourneStar, @Jack4576, @Jabberjaw, @GA Melbourne, @Compusolus, @Gusfriend.

Would especially be grateful for any assistance in providing feedback on whether the article is comprehensible to the casual reader, or if not, assisting with ideas on how to improve. Also need source integrity checking. Any assistance appreciated. This article was one of the projects only featured articles and after its delisting I have spent 14 months trying to get it back. Cheers — MaxnaCarta  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:47, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of s.68 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act

[edit]

There is a discussion at Talk:Australian Defence Force#Role of the Governor General that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Melbguy05 (talk) 10:45, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Australian_law&oldid=1239274652"