The Melbourne University Law Review is now accepting submissions for the second issue of volume 50! Submissions will remain open until 30 April 2026. #auslaw

ISSUE 48(3): Using the Kakadu plum as a case study, Jocelyn Bosse (@JocelynBosse) examines how the flawed bilateral approach embedded in Australia’s access and benefit sharing laws undermines their objective and discusses potential ways to reform them. https://t.co/jdadyg14zh

ISSUE 48(3): Nicholas Tiverios and David Winterton discuss the development of negotiating damages awards for breach of contract across the Commonwealth, contrasting English and Singaporean law to chart a course for Australia. https://t.co/Nq7nxVGDjY

ISSUE 48(3): Jason Chin (@socpsychupdate) investigates the pitfalls, promises and realities of systematic research summaries as expert evidence by identifying areas for improvement, contrasting the law and other domains of evidence-based decision-making. https://t.co/aPsa5Eej5Z

ISSUE 48(3): With Australia becoming the first jurisdiction to allow general medical access to psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy, Reeve McClelland and Christopher Rudge (@chrisrudge) consider three legal issues likely to cause problems in its delivery. https://t.co/7MvHDc3wLv

ISSUE 48(3): Sharon Erbacher and Jason Taliadoras critique the Australian law of damages for false imprisonment established in Lewis v ACT, as inherited from the English decision, Lumba, and problematise its doctrinal and theoretical basis. https://t.co/Zt2VuGFG8o

ISSUE 48(2): Juliette Overland (@ProfJOverland), Clinton Free (@sydney_business) and Charlie Guerit scrutinise the federal government’s inaction on reform of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and propose measures to enhance its engagement with corporate law reform inquiries.

ISSUE 48(2): John Ledda investigates the uncertainties concerning the scope of the s 51(xxxvii) referred matters power, considering four drafting issues that legislative drafters must address when preparing legislation for schemes relying on the power. https://t.co/hZSoxU761o

ISSUE 48(2): Jamie Glister (@SydneyLawSchool) and Pauline Ridge (@ANU_Law) clarify the relationship between fiduciary liability and knowing assistance liability, focusing on the release rule, split elections and contribution. https://t.co/R4pYPZYhcy

ISSUE 48(2): Georgina Dimopoulos (@SCU_Australia) examines recent examples of judgments being written for the benefit of children, contends that this trend is laudable and outlines principles for its development. https://t.co/NKhxbdmYnq

ISSUE 48(2): Joachim Dietrich (@BondUniversity) and Iain Field (@UQLaw) articulate the conceptual, theoretical and practical issues that contribute to the ongoing uncertainty as to whether consent operates as a defence to battery or whether the absence of consent is an element of

ISSUE 48(2): Noah Corbett, Andrew Edgar and Yane Svetiev (@SydneyLawSchool) examine Australia’s adoption of the FATF anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing standards and analyse the effects of FATF peer reviews on domestic legislative deliberation.

ISSUE 48(2): Rick Bigwood (@UQLaw), Pauline Ridge (@ANU_Law) and Jeannie Marie Paterson (@JMPaters) consider the Amadio doctrine and argue that applications of the doctrine by subsequent benches of the High Court unduly narrow the doctrine’s scope. The authors argue that it is

ISSUE 49(1): Justice Emilios Kyrou AO, President of the Administrative Review Tribunal, traces the evolution of Australian administrative tribunals, highlighting their shift from the machinery of government to independent bodies central to reviewing decisions and fostering good

ISSUE 49(1): Ben Ye and Rebecca Lucas critically examine the rise of the special case procedure in the High Court and highlight the need for greater scrutiny of its use. https://t.co/1juFnaKzZ8

ISSUE 49(1): Dr Kellie Toole traces the history of Australian law on bestiality, exploring its religious and cultural origins and interrogating whether those rationales hold up as legitimate bases in the context of contemporary criminal law. https://t.co/daldDkTBMp

ISSUE 49(1): Professor Dan Meagher challenges the High Court’s rejection of a void-for-vagueness doctrine, arguing that the Australian Constitution would not preclude such a doctrine if required to preserve judicial separation of powers. https://t.co/sZN98GsSbx

ISSUE 49(1): Associate Professor Tatiana Dancy (@Tatiana_Dancy) examines the use of the LSI-R risk assessment tool in Australian corrective services, highlighting concerns about its application to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander persons and calling for greater public

ISSUE 49(1): Professor Lisa Burton Crawford (@dr_lbc) reconsiders the limits of judicial power to interpret legislation and concludes that it is prudent to rethink both the scope of judicial power to contribute to legislation and the scope of legislative power to enact vague

The Melbourne University Law Review is accepting submissions for the third issue of volume 49 until Sunday 31 August 2025 — just under a week to get them in! We can’t wait to read them all. #auslaw