18.09.2014

Aged care

6.38       This section outlines how the National Decision-Making Principles and the Commonwealth decision-making model may apply to aged care to ensure equal recognition before the law and legal capacity for older persons with disability.6.39       Older people receiving aged care services who have intellectual, cognitive, physical or mental disabilities may find it difficult, without support, to

Publications

Read more
18.09.2014

Supported decision-making at a Commonwealth level

Recommendation 4–1               A Commonwealth decision-making model that encourages supported decision-making should be introduced into relevant Commonwealth laws and legal frameworks in a form consistent with the National Decision-Making Principles and Recommendations 4–2 to 4–9. 4.5          In the ALRC’s view, it is desirable to introduce statutory mechanisms for formal supported decision-making at a Commonwealth level. 4.6         

Publications

Read more
18.09.2014

Interaction with other appointed decision-makers

4.128   One of the major difficulties in applying the Commonwealth decision-making model is determining the appropriate interaction of supporters and representatives with other supporters and representatives, as well as state and territory appointed decision-makers, such as guardians and administrators. The NSW Government observed that important issues in relation to this interaction include: Whether state-based appointees

Publications

Read more
18.09.2014

International context

United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities2.4          TheCRPD was the first binding international human rights instrument to explicitly address disability. Australia was an active participant and leader in its development, contributing greatly to the negotiations of the text of the Convention.[2] Australia was also one of the original signatories when it opened

Publications

Read more
18.09.2014

Recommendations

Download PDF of Recommendations.3. National Decision-Making PrinciplesRecommendation 3–1               Reform of Commonwealth, state and territory laws and legal frameworks concerning individual decision-making should be guided by the National Decision-Making Principles and Guidelines (see Recommendations 3–2 to 3–4) to ensure that:supported decision-making is encouraged;representative decision-makers are appointed only as a last resort; andthe will, preferences and rights of

Publications

Read more
18.09.2014

Terms of Reference

Review of equal recognition before the law and legal capacity for people with disabilityI, Mark Dreyfus QC MP, Attorney-General of Australia, having regard to:the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, to which Australia is a party and which sets out:rights for people with disability to recognition before the law, to legal

Publications

Read more
03.09.2014

Report into Serious Invasions of Privacy in the Digital Era released

The Australian Law Reform Commission’s Final Report, Serious Invasions of Privacy in the Digital Era (Report 123, 2014) was tabled in Parliament today and is now publicly available.The Terms of Reference for this Inquiry, required the ALRC to design a tort to deal with serious invasions of privacy in the digital era.  In this Report,

News/Media Release

Read more
15.07.2014

A Commonwealth Act

Recommendation 14–1 The Commonwealth Government should enact surveillance legislation to replace existing state and territory surveillance device laws. 14.15 There are significant inconsistencies between existing state and territory surveillance device laws. There are differences between the laws with respect to the types of surveillance devices covered, the types of activities which amount to an offence,

Publications

Read more
15.07.2014

Cause of action limited to natural persons

Recommendation 10–2 The new tort should only be actionable by natural persons. 10.41 The ALRC recommends that the statutory cause of action for serious invasion of privacy be limited to natural persons.[31] This means that corporations, government agencies or other organisations[32] would not have standing to sue for invasions of privacy. This recommendation was unanimously

Publications

Read more
15.07.2014

Negligence

7.45 The ALRC does not recommend that negligent invasion of privacy be actionable under the new tort. Negligence depends on whether the actor’s conduct[46] measured up to an objective standard of what a reasonable person in the position of the defendant would or would not do in the circumstances. In this objective test, the intention

Publications

Read more