Strapped Victorian Legal Aid Turned Over More Than 100 Staff In Last Financial Year And Ran Up $3.1 Million Deficit

This type of “it’s okay, since they are poor people” legislation is a slippery slope. It requires very little for the government to expand the meaning of ‘declared and ‘association’ offences’, once it’s okay to handle ‘associates’ more roughly than people. The police service will be aching at the touch to use these forces to rein in criminal activity that is maybe not gang related (such as low-level drug dealing). The government will be anxious to expand the listing of declared offences to handle action they regard politically unsavoury. How soon before protest groups are focused, or unions?

In Symonds v Vass the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against a decision providing judgment at trial for the defendant on an advocates’ immunity defence. The trial judge had discovered that the solicitors negligently caused damage, but that these were immune from suit. The settlement in that case were suggested by the solicitors and effected 5 weeks in to the trial. The test judge’s choice on the question of reduction was faulty and the Court of Appeal remitted the matter for retrial. Justice of Appeal Ipp thought that there was no point in this since the advocates’ immunity defence was a great one.

Whilst the two deaths and studies had some cultural and legal cross-overs the differences are legion

The vital consideration when creating aparenting order is the needs of the child or children the issue ofthat order (s 60CA)

I've never heard about life parole or have others whom i have raised this issue with. Except for the two categories mentioned above. Parole is set during sentencing by the judge. A bottom rate of gaol time is established that's the least number of gaol time that must be served before parole might be applied for. In tommy’s case, it seems that his life sentence has been transferred from gaol time to parole time but who made that choice? Was it judge or magistrate or was that absurd choice initiated only by the nt parole board? Or perhaps an nt politician? We don’t know.

Ryder’s attackers were sentenced to terms ranging from four to six years. The phrase of 1, who'd struck no blows, was to be halted after twelve months; the remaining four had non-parole periods of three-and-a-half to four years. I said anything to the woman about the difference in the type of assault, in particular about Woods’s utilization of a knife. I didn’t press the position with her, but the sentence, or at least the non-parole period, was not much harsher than four from the Ryder five had obtained, although Woods’s culpability was considered greater – he’d been “reckless” fairly than “negligent.”