15.10.2021
Improving the Navigability of Legislation (FSL3)
This discussion of legislation and its navigability is the third in a series of background papers to be released by the Australian Law Reform Commission as part of its Review of the Legislative Framework for Corporations and Financial Services Regulation (‘the Inquiry’). These background papers are intended to provide a high-level overview of topics of …
Read more15.10.2021
Complexity and Legislative Design (FSL2)
This summary of complexity and legislative design is the second in a series of background papers to be released by the Australian Law Reform Commission as part of its Review of the Legislative Framework for Corporations and Financial Services Regulation (‘the Inquiry’). These background papers are intended to provide a high-level overview of topics of …
Read more21.06.2021
Initial Stakeholder Views (FSL1)
This summary of initial stakeholder views is the first in a series of background papers to be released by the Australian Law Reform Commission as part of its Review of the Legislative Framework for Corporations and Financial Services Regulation (‘the Inquiry’). These background papers are intended to provide a high-level overview of topics of relevance …
Read more30.04.2021
Judicial Impartiality: Consultation Paper (CP 1, 2021)
The ALRC seeks stakeholder submissions on 25 questions and reform proposals in relation to judicial impartiality and the law on bias. The Terms of Reference for this Inquiry ask the ALRC to consider whether: the law about actual or apprehended bias relating to judicial decision-making is sufficient and appropriate to maintain public confidence in the …
Read more29.04.2021
The Fair-Minded Observer and its Critics (JI7)
This paper considers the test used to decide when a judge will be disqualified from hearing a case because there is a risk that people might think they might be biased. The notion of judicial impartiality is so central to confidence in the administration of justice that the law has developed this mechanism — disqualification …
Read more29.04.2021
Cognitive and Social Biases in Judicial Decision-Making (JI6)
This paper aims to shed light on the psychology behind the traditionally ‘opaque exercise of judging’. First, the paper explains how heuristics, attitudes, and stereotypes may influence (and bias) human decision-making. It then discusses research that has found that judges are likely to be vulnerable to many of the ordinary cognitive and social biases that …
Read more28.04.2021
Ethics, Professional Development, and Accountability (JI5)
This background paper briefly examines the relationship between judicial ethics, professional development, impartiality, and accountability. It then provides a survey of existing ethical infrastructure, professional development standards, and mechanisms to respond to judicial misconduct and incapacity relating to the federal judiciary. This is one in a series of background papers produced by the Australian Law Reform Commission …
Read more16.04.2021
Conceptions of Judicial Impartiality in Theory and Practice (JI4)
This background paper provides an overview of scholarship and commentary on judicial impartiality, summarising the common conceptual understandings of judicial impartiality and the interactions of these conceptions with the practical exercise of judgecraft in Australia. It forms the basis for understanding some of the underlying tensions raised in a series of background papers that explore …
Read more30.03.2021
The Federal Judiciary – the Inquiry in Context (JI3)
This background paper provides an overview of the composition of the federal judiciary; the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth courts; the workload of those courts; and the frequency of complaints against judicial officers (noting that such complaints may not necessarily be in relation to an allegation of impartiality or bias). It also gives a preliminary analysis …
Read more30.03.2021
Recusal and self-disqualification (JI2)
This background paper is focused on the practical matter of how courts manage claims (and the potential for claims) by litigants that the judicial officer deciding their matter is, or might appear to be, biased. This is one in a series of background papers produced by the Australian Law Reform Commission as part of its Review …
Read more