Australian Feminist Judgments Righting and Rewriting Law

Name: Australian Feminist Judgments
Brand: Hart Publishing
SKU: 9781849465212
Price: 693.42 HKD
Availability: InStock
Author: Heather Douglas; Francesca Bartlett; Trish Luker; Rosemary Hunter
ISBN: 9781849465212

Edited by Heather Douglas · Francesca Bartlett · Trish Luker · Rosemary Hunter

Hart Publishing January 2015

Specifications

ISBN-13: 9781849465212
Publisher: Hart Publishing
Publication: January 2015
Format: Paperback , 382 pages
Jurisdiction: U.K. ? Countri(es) for reference only

Details

This book brings together feminist academics and lawyers to present an impressive collection of alternative judgments in a series of Australian legal cases. By re-imagining original legal decisions through a feminist lens, the collection explores the possibilities, limits and implications of feminist approaches to legal decision-making. Each case is accompanied by a brief commentary that places it in legal and historical context and explains what the feminist rewriting does differently to the original case. The cases not only cover topics of long-standing interest to feminist scholars – such as family law, sexual offences and discrimination law – but also areas which have had less attention, including Indigenous sovereignty, constitutional law, immigration, taxation and environmental law. The collection contributes a distinctly Australian perspective to the growing international literature investigating the role of feminist legal theory in judicial decision-making.

1.
Introduction: Righting Australian Law: Heather Douglas, Francesca Bartlett, Trish Luker and Rosemary Hunter; 2.
Reflections on Rewriting the Law: Heather Douglas, Francesca Bartlett, Trish Luker and Rosemary Hunter; Part I Public Law Constitutional Law; 3.
Kartinyeri v The Commonwealth [1998] HCA: Commentary: Kathy Bowrey; First Nations Stories, Grandmother’s Law: Too Many Stories to Tell: Irene Watson; 4.
R v Pearson; Ex parte Sipka [1983] HCA 6: Feminism and the Franchise: Elisa Arcioni; Judgment: Kim Rubenstein; 5.
Dietrich v R [1992] HCA: Commentary: Margaret Davies; Judgment: Reg Graycar and Jenny Morgan; Tax Law; 6.
Lodge v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1972] HCA: Commentary: Ann O’Connell; Judgment: Kerrie Sadiq; Immigration Law; 7.
Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs;Ex parte Applicants S134/2002 [2003] HCA 1: Roqia’s Story: Refugees and Natural Justice in the Court of Public Opinion: Mary Crock; Judgment: Charlotte Steer; 8.
Appellant S395/2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs[2003] HCA: Commentary: Wayne Morgan; Judgment: Nan Seuffert; Environmental Law; 9.
Wildlife Preservation Society of Queensland Proserpine/Whitsunday Branch Inc v Minister for the Environment and Heritage [2006] FCA: Addressing Climate Change Inequities: The Contribution of a Feminist Judgment: Jacqueline Peel; Judgment: Lee Godden; Part II Private Law; Torts; 10.
Cattanach v Melchior [2003] HCA: The Economic Value of Human Relationships: Cattanach v Melchior Revisited: Isabel Karpin; Judgment: Kylie Burns; Consumer Protection; 11.
ACCC v Keshow [2005] FCA: Unconscionability, Education and Indigenous Women: Bronwyn Naylor; Judgment: Heron Loban; Equity; 12.
Louth v Diprose [1992] HCA 61: Give and Take: Unconscionability and the Pervasiveness of Gender Stereotypes: Paula Baron; Judgment: Francesca Bartlett; 13.
Trustees of the Property of John Daniel Cummins, a Bankrupt v Cummins [2006] HCA 6: Formal Equality and Third Party Interests in the Family Home: Francesca Bartlett; Judgment: Lisa Sarmas; Part III Crime and Evidence; Criminal Law; 14.
Parker v R [1963] HCA 14: Reconsidering Precedent: Heather Douglas; Judgment: Adrian Howe; 15.
Taikato v R [1996] HCA 28: A Well-founded Fear? Giving Context to Self-defence: Julie Stubbs; Judgment: Penny Crofts and Isabella Alexander; 16.
PGA v R [2012] HCA 21: Admitting Legal Wrongs: Ngaire Naffine; Judgment: Wendy Larcombe and Mary Heath; Evidence; 17.
RPS v R [2000] HCA 3: Commentary: Katherine Biber; Judgment: Helen O’Sullivan; 18.
Phillips v R [2006] HCA 4: Locating Consent in Similar-Fact Cases: Mehera San Roque; Judgment: Annie Cossins; Sentencing; 19.
R v Webster [1990] NSWSC 70012/90: Truth in Sentencing: The Narration of Judgment: Kirsty Duncanson; Judgment: Honni van Rijswijk and Lesley Townsley; 20.
R v Middendorp [2010] VSC 202: Defensive Homicide: JaneMaree Maher; Judgment: Kate Fitz-Gibbon, Danielle Tyson and Jude McCulloch; 21.
R v Morgan [2010] VSCA 15: Intersectionality and Indigenous Sentencing Courts: Heather Douglas; Judgment: Elena Marchetti and Janet Ransley; Part IV Interpreting Equality; Family Law; 22.
U v U [2002] HCA 36: Commentary: Rachael Field; Judgment: Jonathan Crowe; 23.
Goode and Goode [2006] FamCA 1: The Practice of Feminist Judgment in Family Law: Ann Genovese; Judgment: Zoe Rathus and Renata Alexander; Discrimination Law; 24.
JM v QFG and GK [1998] QCA: Commentary: Paula Gerber; Judgment: Anita Stuhmcke; 25.
McLeod v Power [2003] FMCA 2: Commentary: Katharine Gelber; Judgment: Jennifer Nielsen; 26.
The State of New South Wales v Amery [2006] HCA 14: The Indirection of Sex Discrimination: Margaret Thornton; Judgment: Beth Gaze; Treaty Law; 27.
In the matter of Djappari (Re Tuckiar) [2035] FNCA 1: Commentary: Thalia Anthony; Judgment: Nicole Watson

About the Author

Heather Douglas and Francesca Bartlett research and teach at the T C Beirne School of Law, The University of Queensland. Trish Luker is a Chancellor's Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Faculty of Law, University of Technology, Sydney Rosemary Hunter is a Professor at Kent Law School, University of Kent.

HKD 693.42 −3%

HKD 714.87

Inclusive of HK delivery

Ready to ship

Quantity