Congratulations to our student Sarah Hibbard (currently on exchange at the University of Copenhagen) who’s been awarded the Crown Princess Mary Scholarship!
The scholarship was set up as a wedding gift for Crown Prince Frederick and his wife, Crown Princess Mary.
Adam Webster is a PhD student at the Adelaide Law School and a 2012 Fulbright South Australia Scholar. He shares his experiences as a visiting scholar in the United States.
I am a PhD candidate at the Adelaide Law School and was one of two winners of a 2012 Fulbright South Australia Scholarship. My PhD research examines the rights of the States of Australia to water from rivers that flow through more than one State. I am currently spending 10 months in the United States for the purpose of investigating how interstate water disputes have been resolved in the United States, and considering whether these approaches can be applied in Australia. In particular, I am interested in the role that the United States Supreme Court has played in settling interstate water disputes.
Colorado National Monument
I arrived in the United States in August last year and spent the first 6 months visiting the Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment at the University of Colorado Law School in Boulder, Colorado. Since February this year I have been visiting the James E Rogers College of Law at the University of Arizona in Tucson, Arizona.
One of the interesting features of the development of water law in the United States is that the States in the western region of the US have taken a very different approach to intrastate water allocation compared to the eastern States. Broadly speaking, States in the east adopted an approach that attempted to preserve the natural flow of the river, because when the relevant laws were developed (in the nineteenth century) the flow of the water was used to operate mills on the banks of rivers and streams. In the drier western States water use was driven largely by mining and irrigation – uses which required water to be diverted from the river, thereby depleting its flow. Consequently, rights to water were granted on a first-in-time basis, irrespective of how that water use might disturb the natural flow of the river for subsequent downstream users.
University of Colorado Law School
The fact that different approaches to intrastate water allocation were adopted only further complicated how water from interstate rivers, such as the Colorado River and Arkansas River, was to be shared between States. While many interstate water disputes have been solved by the States entering into a compact (or what we might refer to in Australia as an ‘intergovernmental agreement’), some disputes have not been able to be resolved in this way and have been litigated by States in the United States Supreme Court. The United States Constitution does not expressly deal with interstate water rights; however, the Supreme Court has held that there is an ‘equality of right’ between States and, as a consequence, each State is entitled to an ‘equitable apportionment’ of the water of the interstate river. From an Australian perspective, the interesting question is whether the High Court of Australia could adopt a similar approach in resolving and future disputes over the waters of the River Murray. Examining this question is an important part of my PhD research.
President Obama at the University of Colorado
Beyond the PhD research, my time in the United States has, and continues to be, an amazing experience. Colorado was a ‘swing State’ in the US Presidential Election and while in Boulder I had the opportunity on two occasions to hear President Obama speak on campus. Understanding the differences between the Australian and United States electoral systems and comparing the different issues which are central to an election campaign in the two countries was fascinating.
I have also had the opportunity to take a couple of road trips: I have travelled across the Rocky Mountains and followed the Colorado River into Utah; and when moving from Boulder to Tucson, took the 1000 mile drive down through Colorado and New Mexico and across to Arizona. Getting out and seeing the countryside has made me realise how similar the dry conditions are to those in Australia. This region of the United States is heavily reliant on snow melt (and being about to store it) for its water supply.
Monument Valley
Living in Boulder at an attitude of 1655m (5430ft) at the foot of the Rocky Mountains took a little getting used to; especially going for a run during winter when the temperature dropped to -20°C. By comparison, Falls Creek Village is at 1600m and Mt Hotham Village is at 1750m. I am currently in Tucson, Arizona, which is very different from both Boulder and Adelaide. There are cacti 3-4m tall everywhere and I am told that during summer there will often be 100 days over 100°F (38°C). Temperatures like that make Adelaide’s most recent summer look cool. Fortunately for me I will be heading back home to Adelaide in June!
Tucson, Arizona
Written by Adam Webster
As legal academics our voice is arguably the most important teaching tool we possess. However, while we may have specialised knowledge of the law, very few if any of us have any formal voice training. And, as many of us have experienced, teaching for hours on end (especially in rooms with noisy air conditioners or traffic noise!) can cause pain, hoarseness, and even temporary muteness. In this two hour workshop we will learn techniques to control and project our voices, so as to protect this valuable teaching asset, for the benefit of our students as well as ourselves!
Speaker: Marilyn Boadycoat, Speechmatters
Marilyn Bodycoat has over twenty three years experience in voice coaching. She is an Associate of both the Australian Music Examinations Board and Trinity College of London. Over the past eleven years, Marilyn has trained newsreaders and reporters from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, senior managers from Macquarie Bank and Adelaide Bank, executives of Statewide Superannuation, real estate agents, accountants and lawyers from leading Adelaide companies, engineers and doctors.
Venue: Room 316, Ligertwood Building
Date: 10.00-12.00 Monday 15 July 2013
More information can be found here.
A symposium presented by the postgraduate Comparative Law class at the Adelaide Law School
The University of Adelaide
Date: 11 May 2013
Time: 9am for 9.15 am start – 3.15 pm
Location: Moot Court, Ligertwood Building, The University of Adelaide
No attendance fee, but rsvp necessary.
RSVP: cornelia.koch@adelaide.edu.au by 9 May 2013
The Adelaide Law School is delighted to invite you to attend a symposium on compulsory voting in comparative perspective, presented by its postgraduate Comparative Law class. The symposium addresses the question whether people should be compelled to vote in a democratic system of government. The Australian electoral system is considered by electoral specialists to be one of the finest in the world and supporters of compulsory voting attribute this inter alia to the mandatory nature of participation in elections. In contrast, opponents argue that in a liberal society nobody should be forced to vote. The presentations at this symposium place compulsory voting in a global context.
The keynote address will be delivered by Mike Wait from the Crown Solicitor’s Office, who was counsel in the recent Holmdahl case that challenged compulsory voting in Australia. The other speakers are Masters students from Malaysia, Cambodia, France, Germany and Australia.
Attendance may attract CPD points for MCPD purposes.
More information is found here.
On 21 May at 5.30pm, as part of Law Week, an Adelaide University Law School team comprising Sarah Grant and Raffaele Piccolo (supported by Meaghan Kostecki) will debate a team from Flinders University Law School in the Finlaysons Boardroom (Level 12, 81 Flinders street) on the question of whether the existing rules of International Humanitarian Law are adequate to deal with the rising phenomenon of cyber warfare. The Adelaide team will be taking the negative position, thus arguing that the current framework is not adequate. The event is sponsored by both the Red Cross and Finlaysons. The event promises to be a rich engagement of ideas in a rapidly developing area of warfare and a strong turnout from Adelaide staff, students and alumni would be greatly encouraged.
Bookings for this event are essential and contact details are provided on the flyer
here.
Adelaide Law School Academic Dr Suzanne LeMire recently appeared on Radio National regarding proposed changes to the Legal Practitioners Act. Changes are proposed to encompass the conduct of lawyers in the course of their professional duties as well as behaviour that occurs outside of their work. While some of the proposals are being welcomed by reformers there are concerns about the regulatory body’s impartiality and the effectiveness of dealing with fraudulent conduct by insolvent law firms.
To hear the full Radio National Interview, please click here.
An article about Adelaide Law Professor Andrew Stewart’s other career as a musician appears in the March issue of the ‘Bulletin Volume 35 – Issue 2′ which is produced by the The Law Society of South Australia. The article is written by David Barnfield and is published on this blog courtesy of the Law Society of South Australia.
To see the article, please click here.
(1)
(44)
(12)
(76)
(3)
(39)
(32)
(1)
Next CPD Event – The Role of the Profession in the Absence of a Legislative Human Rights Instrument
The National Human Rights Consultation was a broad ranging community consultation about the protection of human rights in Australia. Its major critics saw it as a stalking horse for a bill of rights. The committee engaged focus groups and random polling as well as over 60 community roundtables, a three day national symposium and received tens of thousands of submissions. The committee put forward a cascading set of recommendations in the light of the findings. Government declined to proceed with a Human Rights Act but enacted measures enhancing parliamentary scrutiny of legislation and Executive compliance with key international human rights instruments. In this presentation, Frank Brennan will ask what are the ongoing shortcomings in Australia’s arrangements for protecting human rights and how might lawyers assist the community in making up the shortfall.
Presenter
Father Frank Brennan SJ AO, Professor of Law, Australian Catholic University, Adjunct Professor of Law, ANU and the National Centre for Indigenous Studies
Father Frank Brennan had been a self-confessed fence sitter on a Human Rights Act is a Jesuit priest, professor of law at Australian Catholic University and Adjunct Professor at the Australian National University College of Law and National Centre for Indigenous Studies. He was the founding director of Uniya, the Australian Jesuit Social Justice Centre. He is a board member of St Vincents Health Australia and chairs the policy committee of Jesuit Social Services. In 2009, he chaired the Australian National Human Rights Consultation Committee.
Date: Thursday 27 June 2013
Time: 7.20 am – 8.30 am
Breakfast: A buffet continental breakfast will be served, accompanied by tea, coffee and juice
Venue: National Wine Centre (Cnr North Tce and Hackney Road)
Parking: Parking is available along Hackney Road and Plane Tree Drive after the first Parking Bay. Charges will apply.
Cost: $130 – Standard ticket
$110 – Alumni ticket
*$75 – Young lawyers discount ticket (for those who have been admitted for less than 3 years)
$40 – Adelaide GDLP Students
The event will attract 1 CPD point in practical ethics.
Please RSVP by 25 June 2013 to here.
Information about other CPD events in the Adelaide Law School Breakfast Seminar Series is available at here.