 As a law student, I have attended countless MLS events. Normally, they are enlightening and distinguished.
But, when I recently received an email promoting a conversation on sexual assault in the legal sector, I was shocked by the sole listed presenter – The Hon Kenneth Hayne AC QC. Hayne is a formidable judge, and I would not blink an eye if this event had him speaking to one of his areas of expertise – the Banking Royal Commission, for example. However, he is not someone who has demonstrated expertise or experience of sexual assault. Nor, is he someone that has been victimised by the glass ceiling, or boys’ club mentality rife in the legal profession. In fact, Hayne has explicitly benefitted from these things. His marriage to Michelle Gordon, whom he met when she was his instructing solicitor 20 years his junior, validates and encourages the culture of senior men making advances on young lawyers. It has clearly worked out for this so-called “power-couple”, but the vast majority of older men who hit on their younger female colleagues do so unwelcomed, and it turns into sexual harassment or assault far too often. Why did MLS think it was a good idea to have a conversation about sexual assault in the legal profession, but have the sole presenter be a man, and someone with the seniority and background of Kenneth Hayne at that? People with structural power should not be the voices we give a platform to when it comes to discussing issues which overwhelmingly affect those without structural power. Women make up the vast majority of sexual assault victims, and men make up the vast majority of offenders. This appointment reinforces the sexism in the legal profession that gives rise to sexual assault, while piggybacking off sexual assault victims’ trauma. It is virtue signalling at its most transparent.
29 Comments
Volume 19, Issue 9 If you have a burning question you’d like our Learned Friend to answer, fill out the google form under the “Your Learned Friend” tab on the De Minimis website.  Dear Dripping in Distress
While there is nothing wrong with being proud to be an MLS student, wearing merch off campus is the uni equivalent of being the high school prefect who wore their badges off duty (you know who you are). It sends the message that you eat, sleep and breathe law school. Reading statute is your one true joy in life. You can name all High Court Justices 12 standards in on a Friday night. You are one set of Invisalign away from the veneer-like porcelains that will get you your own brochure feature on the JD handbook. If this is the image you wish to put out there, then by all means. If you’d like to cultivate a less MLS-centric personality though, maybe consider reaching for a different grey hoodie. I get it – it’s week 9, exams are looming and laundry baskets spilling. However, wearing MLS merch outside your own house is only going to make things worse. It’s one thing to feel like you’re on the verge of breaking down, it’s another to openly broadcast it. Wearing MLS merch at uni sends the message of “I’m hanging onto this degree by a thread, and that thread is mostly polyester.” Volume 19, Issue 9  Photo by Matthew Henry on Unsplash Gale Galderon is in a bit of trouble.
The self-described intellectual cowboy should have learnt his lesson on the last exam he failed, but Gale is quite sure that this time he has all the answers. Well, technically the answers are not his. He says that’s beside the point. “Tap tap tap. Scribble scribble scribble. That white noise you hear in every class of people taking notes. Don’t you just hate it? What’s the point when I can just use someone else’s notes for the exam? Half the effort for twice the reward. [REDACTED] made the best notes anyway. My classmates can keep their carpal tunnel, the suckers.” De Minimis writers, renowned for our faithfulness to high moral standards, made sure to warn the young student that his strategy was likely to put him in the Academic Misconduct Committee’s crosshairs – but he could not be deterred. Volume 19, Issue 8 Tim Irving  Photo by Denise Jans on Unsplash Sadly, not every film can be the first Shrek – Not every film can be widely popular and beloved. It’s an immensely difficult task to accomplish, and to me is achieved through finding the perfect balance of artistic quality and commerciality. Raw filmmaking quality and the inclusion of advanced film techniques often creates enjoyable films, however enjoyable films that nobody bothers to see. On the flip side, extreme commerciality without real quality might achieve the $$$ at the box office, but nonetheless doesn’t translate into must-see events.
This particularly struck me watching this year’s Academy Awards, where it dawned on me the average person has arguably never even heard of many of the nominated films. This is especially noticeable in comparison to last year’s awards, where the nominated films were widely discussed, enjoyable, must-see events. In my own experience, many people recommended or wanted to go see films like Parasite, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Joker, and 1917. I can’t really recall anyone having recommended films from this year’s field of nominees to me. It goes without saying the dreaded COVID is greatly to blame. Cinemas were shut and movies were delayed out of this awards season, leading to a depleted field of nominees. It could also be said that there is a shift occurring away from movies and towards TV/streaming. It is undeniable that these reasons contributed, but I don’t think they are entirely to blame either. Many of the nominated films were available on streaming services, and for us in Melbourne cinemas have been open for many months. I’d also argue that while this was a depleted field of films, the major delayed films were probably unlikely to meaningfully compete and dramatically alter the field of nominees. Finally, while there probably is a general shift towards TV/Streaming, I don’t think it is sizeable enough to have established this degree of ambivalence for movies so quickly. Volume 19, Issue 8 Matt Harper Making the news these past few weeks was the bombshell news that Menulog, Australia’s homegrown food delivery rival to Uber Eats, is planning to trial giving its drivers employee status. This marks a radical departure from prevailing trends in the industry, with major players like Deliveroo and Uber Eats steadfastly maintaining an opposition to any moves to strip their drivers of their current classification as independent contractors. The announcement and what it may mean for the future of insecure work provides abundant fuel for thought about the ethical and economic implications of an ever-expanding gig economy, but it also raises some extremely interesting legal questions as well, leading us to question in whose favour these apparent acts of corporate charity are actually working. The changes were announced by Menulog’s managing director Morten Belling at, fittingly enough, a public hearing of the Senate Select Committee on Job Security on the 12th of April. The timing and nature of the announcement was clearly designed for maximum impact and effect, painting the company as the ‘good guys’ in an industry currently receiving a great deal of bad press for its perceived insecure, unsafe, and exploitative business model.  Volume 19, Issue 8 Next Wednesday evening, the LSS will hold a Special General Meeting, to propose several changes to their Constitution. De Minimis has written this short analysis of the proposed changes, to help if you’re unsure what the proposed changes are all about. New rule: By far and away the biggest proposed change is the addition of a new rule: ‘Rule 61A Transparency’. In a proactive move, the new ‘Transparency’ rule will see the LSS publish key operating information, without Members needing to file a request. In addition, the Committee is charged ‘to ensure the transparency of the Association’. In the past, the LSS has drawn criticism for its perceived opacity, and it seems as though this new rule is aimed squarely at quashing such attacks. Certain information will still not be volunteered under the proposed change (membership information, for example, or details on sponsorships), but there are likely considered policy reasons for such omissions. It appears as though the change will also force a departure from the established practice of the LSS Committee approving the minutes of a meeting at the subsequent meeting, which currently delays access to minutes for weeks or months. It is also pleasing to see the explicit inclusion of key financial information in the list of items to be voluntarily published, after financial issues brought on by the COVID pandemic gave some Members an unwelcome surprise at last year’s AGM. The only issue in what is a very positive proposal is a spelling mistake in r 61A(3). If passed, this will have to be corrected at a future General Meeting. Nevertheless, the new rule is likely to be well-received by Members, who will be able to more easily oversee the activities of their representatives.  Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash
Volume 19, Issue 7 Winston Baker  In a move guaranteed to stoke tensions with the uni, the MLS Student Collective (MLSSC) today announced to pay for online classes in a manner more befitting their value.
Describing the decision as a “no brainer”, the Collective, which is comprised of all JD and MLM students, announced plans to pay for subjects undertaken online in the blockchain currency Dogecoin. “Digital lectures, digital currency. It just makes sense,” MLSSC President Pippa Henkerston said in a statement. “The amount paid for each subject will be calculated at a very reasonable Doge-AUD conversion rate of 1:1.” The University of Melbourne had not seen fit to lower fees as the change to online delivery took place last year, despite the qualitative difference in the service delivered. The new move is expected to cause friction with UniMelb administration, who are concerned the move may impact their ability to suck students dry. Volume 19, Issue 7
Rebecca Poynton *** content warning: sexual assault *** The federal government’s consent training video “moving the line” has been taken down after public backlash. The video aimed at year 10-12 students was ridiculed for a number of reasons, but mostly for insulting the intelligence of every human on the planet. Background “The Good Society” is a website created as part of the Australian Government’s “Respect Matters” program. The initiative is funded by the Australian Government Department of Education and aims to teach school-aged children the importance of respecting others in all aspects of life. The video in question is a part of “The Field Model” program (FM), a series introducing year 10-12 students to the notion of consent in their personal relationships. The FM covers a lot of ground and originally included four videos: “Stop, Ask, Listen”, “Yes, No, I Don’t Know!”, “Moving the Line”, and “Stepping In”. As of today only the first and last videos are available, “Yes, No, I Don’t Know!” was apparently taken down long ago for being even more ridiculous than “Moving the Line”. The Video – “Moving the Line” I must say, after seeing the many memes about Scotty’s absolute disaster of a government-approved educational video, I thought “surely it’s not that bad…”. I was wrong. It was bad. If you’d like to see it for yourself, one humble YouTuber, username MininCrafter, managed to upload the entire five minute video before Mr Morrison tried to erase the Godforsaken thing from living memory. If you’d rather not melt your eyes, essentially a young couple is shown drinking milkshakes before the girl proceeds to defy the laws of physics by grabbing a handful of milk and smearing it on her boyfriend’s face. The rest of the video uses the analogy to talk about when an abusive partner “moves the line” of consent and ignores your “no”. So what’s wrong? There are a number of things that this video does wrong. I’ll be touching on just one issue that I think is particularly noteworthy. The issue I have picked is the way the government has managed to reinforce the underlying harmful beliefs that they are trying to prevent, while simultaneously dumbing down the severity of sexual assault. Before I continue, I’d like to say that I will not tolerate any smack talk about the acting. Those unfortunate souls did the best they could with the milky mess they were given. I should also note that the series itself isn’t just about unwanted sexual advances. In later modules it goes on to cover a number of different scenarios couples face, such as spending each other's money or respecting when your partner really does not want to watch The Bee Movie for a fifth time. They confront these issues head on and have some rather uncomfortable scenarios acted out for the camera. To me this just makes the milkshake analogy all the weirder. Splatting a milkshake on your partner’s face, a ‘minor’ incident, is a very far cry from unwanted intercourse. How did this get past the drawing board? The video says that sometimes when a partner ‘moves the line’, that is ignores your ‘no’ in favour of their ‘yes’, you might not mind when it happens once, but start to get upset after a number of minor incidents. It says that the growing number of minor incidents or one serious incident might make you question your partner’s intentions and want to confront them about your issues with their behaviour. Ideally you both mend the problems in the relationship. Volume 19, Issue 7 By Philomena Anderson-Zhang Recently, my deliciously evil Spotify algorithm fed me the new version of Taylor Swift’s 2008 album, Fearless. After switching to a private session – a function which I only recently learnt of and now frequently use so that my 2021 top songs will finally align with my precariously constructed self-image – I remembered how catchy these tunes are. I was transported back to my tweenage years where I eagerly imagined the heartbreak and passion of songs like The Way I Loved You and Forever & Always. Although, now, as an emotionally stunted JD student, thinking about the kind of passion evoked by these songs makes me tired. I just want to arrive windswept, to a home where the only big thing about it is the mortgage, ABC News blaring through my car window. It seems like the rest of the world has also remembered how listenable the album is with it becoming a ‘No. 1 Album Again.’ This emotionally stunted JD student who is alarmingly behind in Copyright became curious as to whether T-Swift could actually re-record her entire oeuvre. The impetus for her decision to re-record has been widely publicised over the last few year. In short, T-Swizzle, supposedly like many artists, does not own the master rights to her back catalogue – these are usually owned by whoever financed the album. The label which owned her master rights was bought by another group and with that purchase came the rights to Taytay’s “musical legacy.” Something which she finds egregious as one of her many feuds is with the owner of this particular group. However, if she had signed away her rights, how is it that she is able to re-record her earlier work without fear of copyright infringement? A cursory google (not even google scholar) led this JD wunderkind to realise that owning the master copies are not the same as owning the copyright to the musical or literary works embodied in the songs. It is common practice for artists to sign away their rights to their music to the record labels which provided funding, particularly if the label is taking a risk on a relatively unknown newbie, as Schwifty was back in the day (I think; I don’t actually remember a time before the Swizzle). Volume 19, Issue 6  Dear Peeved with their Penultimate Peers,
It is an amazing feat for the class of 2020 to be associated with anything beyond beginning a law degree during a global pandemic, and yet this cohort has done just that. While law school is already known for being clique-y, second years have gone above and beyond (cute lil over-achievers). But don’t fret! It’s not just the first years being shunned, but also a large proportion of their own cohort. Volume 19, Issue 6
Melbourne Law School has won its bid to host Season 11 of the post-apocalyptic horror television series. The quiet Parkville building has beaten out a desert hideout in Death Valley and an abandoned medical facility in Chernobyl for the honour. Director Julius Joyce told De Minimis that location scouting for this sort of thing doesn’t usually involve university campuses, since residents tend to be too upbeat. “But that wasn’t an issue with this place,” said Joyce. “The law building is great because we don’t have to look far to find zombie extras. You students really know how to play the part.” A little hurt, I raised my eyebrows and asked what he meant by that. Volume 19, Issue 6 Winston Baker The hearts of the MLS community go out today to our very own Professor Jason Varuhas. The beloved Remedies teacher suffered dual puncture wounds to his neck after a scuffle on the mist-shrouded MLS Moor. This reporter visited the home of the Professor, as he takes time off to recover. What many people don’t know about ‘Big V’ (or Count Varuhas, as he is formally known), is that he hails from a long line of New Zealand nobility. He was kind enough to receive me at his family home – a beautiful building of undressed stone, set in the frigid North Island countryside. I was admitted past the heavy front door by Fushnchup, an austere man who helps the family tend to the house and grounds. Fushnchup showed me into a candle-lit drawing room, where I was graciously received by my host.  Volume 19, Issue 5 Tim Irving 5 Stars Greta Gerwig’s Little Women (2019), available on Amazon Prime, is the most joyous film you’ll ever see. While the film did earn $200 million at the box office, and also received six Academy Award nominations, I’m of the opinion the film is underrated and underappreciated. To me, there are two possible reasons for this: Firstly, this is the seventh film adaptation of Louisa May Alcott’s 1868 novel of the same name, and I think this causes a degree of ambivalence towards any subsequent adaptation. Secondly, 50% of the population, and I think it’s pretty obvious who I’m talking about here, have either never read the novel or never seen one of the films. Further, this segment of the population likely has a certain apprehensiveness to a film with this title, and certainly an apprehensiveness to a film concentrating on four sisters.  Volume 19, Issue 5 Matt Harper Margaret Thatcher once said that there is no such thing as society, only individuals. While Thatcher’s credentials as a sociologist might be doubted, former vice-president of the Fair Work Commission Graeme Watson seems to have taken her specious aphorism to heart in his crusade against collective bargaining in the Australian industrial relations system. The Australian Financial Review last week spruiked Watson’s recent appointment as a partner at Corrs Chambers Westgarth, with his stated purpose to “lead a push by business into agreements with staff that go around the failing enterprise bargaining system” – a move symptomatic of the Right’s increasing willingness to once again make industrial relations ‘reform’ a hot topic on the political and economic agenda, and break what remains of the already vastly reduced influence of unions and collective worker power in Australia.  In response to media enquiries we have received regarding a recent piece which appeared in De Minimis (‘On China’ published 18/3/2021), we have prepared the following statement:
De Minimis does not, nor has it ever, taken a stance on the opinions published in our pages. It is not our role to do so. Per our Constitution, our foremost purpose is to ‘facilitate the free and open exchange of ideas relevant to the Melbourne Law School (MLS) community.’ All articles are published with that purpose in mind. It is our job to allow the opinions and experiences of MLS to come to the fore, to be read by those who are interested. We have always taken this job seriously, and we pride ourselves on giving an unbiased platform to the diverse voices of our School. For example, last year we published a series titled International Perspectives, in collaboration with the Melbourne Law Students’ Society. This series of articles focussed on elevating the experiences of our international student peers. We understand that some members of our community find some of the opinions expressed in our pages distasteful. Strong disagreement is sometimes inevitable. No matter the topic, we welcome students to respond to articles they disagree with, and to advance an article that champions their values. Our inbox is always open. We look forward to continuing our work with the student body. Max Ferguson Editor-In-Chief Volume 19, Issue 4 Anonymous  “So, you have chosen violence.”
The JD student glowered, feet planted, knees slack, shoulders taut and ready for battle. A textbook lay sprawled on the table a few metres behind her, its page number irrelevant, because on her frozen laptop screen was the pained face of Try Guy Keith Habersberger. He glared at the student’s empty seat, begging her to return to his Taco Bell Eat-The-Menu. The sorry scene was hidden by the blue fabric partition pressing in on the student’s heels. Volume 19, Issue 4 This semester, the Admin Law team – not content with their subject’s already horrific reputation – decided to teach the first part of the course partly online through the online learning and assessment module (the OLAM). In this brave new world of dual-delivery learning, we’ve all had to get a bit creative. But some ideas are definitely better than others.  Volume 19, Issue 4  Dear Unmotivated, I have good news for you, motivation is high-key a scam. To expect that you’ll enthusiastically skip into the law library at 9am each morning, complete all your required readings with a grin, and then decide to treat yourself with the extension articles is not only unrealistic, but suspicious. Uni is rough, law school is worse and online law school is simply the worst. Add into that the mental fatigue of being in zoom calls all the time, probably having no friends (unless you’re extroverted and did a BA at UniMelb, in which case you know half the cohort), and doing at least one compulsory unit each semester that you barely tolerate, and it’s a wonder you have the energy to write in. Give up on motivation. Instead, aim for discipline. Printing Class Materials For Students Still Not Worth The Risk, Confirms Melbourne Law School.18/3/2021
Issue 3, Volume 19 Joe Aharfi  “Dear Professor Dean, I write to ask about the class materials that in past years were printed for students by the university. I heard it through the grapevine that they were one of a few casualties in the whole COVIDSafe campus thing. But bars, clubs, and even sporting events are open – surely such reasoning starts to wear a bit thin?” Bruce Badley’s hands were steady as he set down a path of self-ruin. The third year JD student was only 24 - but in scepticism and general world weariness, a kind of carbon dating of the soul, he was about three thousand years old. And he was very, very disappointed. “It seems to me that the budget-cutters are closing in on all sides at Melbourne Law School. The sour-faced bureaucrats, with their blue tongues and darting eyes. Tell me, did they really save this place much money when they scribbled out ‘hard-copy of class materials’ in the long list of law school amenities? I think not!” His fist swung down, slammed hard on his desk. “It all feels so unfair! I pay a lot of money to study here. In fact, in the first week I was so happy to be back on campus that I let the whole thing slide. But enough is enough. It’s been three weeks and I need something to bleat about. So, consider this a demand to print and bind our readings again. Please.” Bruce was struck with the realisation that he had never really read them anyway, but judged this to be an irrelevant detail. “And don’t even get me started on the piano…” Joe Aharfi is a first year JD student The views in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of De Minimis or its Editors. Issue 3, Volume 19 Every piece of plastic ever produced, unless burnt, is still around (1). If you think about it, that’s a lot of plastic (approximately 8.3 billion metric tons!) (2). That’s why last Sunday, on Clean Up Australia Day, the Victorian Environmental Law Student Network (more affectionately known as VELSN) partnered with the Australian Conservation Foundation and volunteers including Federal and Victorian MPs to clean-up the river mouth of the Yarra, a known catchment for river pollution. Standing under the bridge in Westgate Park on a beautiful Sunday morning, it was easy to forget that we were gathered to pick up trash along the Yarra River. From where we stood, the park was pristine, with people enjoying the morning sun and taking walks along the river. And yet, we would soon have collected a whopping 71Kg of waste in less than two hours. At points, it felt as if there was more styrofoam than sand, bottle caps than shells, plastic soy sauce fishies than Bass, Grayling or catfish combined. There was a myriad of other single use plastic items coming from the streets, including hazardous used syringes. That was extremely depressing and heartbreaking. Despite the grimness of finding so much waste in such a small area, there is much within the waste management sphere that we can be hopeful about. We noticed very few single use plastic bags (compared to previous years). And contrary to some pundits, these have largely not been replaced with the reusable ones. This is proof of the positive impact corporate and consumer efforts can have on the environment, if we just try.  A Review of the NGV Triennial Exhibition by Someone Who Knows Absolutely Nothing About Art18/3/2021
Issue 3, Volume 19 Tim Irving To reiterate that title, I know nothing about art. Van Gogh’s the guy that cut his ear off, Pollock’s the guy that looks like he’s spat all over his paintings, and Monet really needs to visit an optometrist and get himself a glasses prescription. Wandering around a gallery sounds exhausting and extremely boring to me, but the current NGV Triennial exhibition only happens every three years, so I guess that means it's good? In attempt to prove that I’m a man of substance and personality, I ventured down Swanston Street to have a look at the 2020 Triennial exhibition. Free with a booking, and closing on April 18, the exhibition is the talk of the town and the current must have Insta-story. My cynical expectation for the exhibition was that it was a place you visited in order to look and feel cool, and not a place you would especially enjoy visiting. Others pretend to like it, and when coupled with the desire to look and feel cool, you pretend to like it too – aka visiting a club (The Swan on a Saturday is the worst place in the world, but I digress).  Image Courtesy of NGV (www.ngv.vic.gov.au/exhibition/triennial-2020) While at the exhibition I saw a “photographer” taking photos of a likely try-hard insta-model in front of exhibits, so my suspicions remain somewhat correct. I’m happy to report however that I was largely proven wrong, and I have no reservations in recommending going and viewing the exhibition. If you’re like me and know nothing about art I can assure you that you’ll have a good time.
The types of art that I’m most familiar with are paintings by the big names that we’ve all seen before, so I have very limited ability to evaluate the contemporary art, design, and architecture that is featured in this exhibition. Thus, take the following thoughts with a grain of salt:
I saw the 2018 Triennial (#imsocoolivebeentothengvmultipletimes), and in my humble opinion 2018 was better than the 2020 exhibition. From memory, 2018 had a greater number of exhibits that were generally more creative and exciting, likely due to differing themes and intentions of the two exhibitions. 2020 features a number of large, entire room occupying pieces that, again in my ignorant opinion, are mostly just fine. I’d prefer to have a greater number of smaller pieces, rather than the chosen larger curation, but you can’t always get whatcha want. This Triennial is interwoven with the permanent collection on the upper floors, perhaps due to the larger size of the ground floor pieces. The signs are not especially helpful in guiding you through, and identifying the Triennial pieces from amongst the permanent collection is not speedily accomplished. This is not necessarily a criticism, more that as a time-sensitive law student it is worth noting that to view the entire Triennial you have to wander through the entire NGV, which can take quite a chunk of time. Grab a mate and head on down to the NGV for the Triennial before it closes April 18. Tim Irving is a first year JD student The views in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of De Minimis or its Editors. Issue 3, Volume 19
Anonymous *Content warning: genocide, sexual assault, racial violence, anti-China sentiment.* From the early 1960s, until the end of Apartheid in 1991, governments, institutions, and individuals stood against the disgusting racism of a white supremacist South African system. Something that I did not know until I started researching this article was that this University was at the forefront of the anti-apartheid movement in Australia, with an activist group called Student Action founded after the Sharpeville massacre. It was recognised that apartheid was an abomination, and that every civilized human being had a moral responsibility to resist it in whatever way they could. Students and faculty boycotted South African cricket matches and South African economic products. Universities and academic journals around the world prevented South African participation in their institutions and publications. Of course, they were accused of politicising sports, and science, and art. However, it was not the anti-apartheid movement politicising the world – it was the South Africans, by politicising our common humanity. The brave activists who walked through these halls ahead of us did this even when the Australian Government cravenly supported South Africa. However, over the decades, their few voices rose to a crushing volume, and eventually forced a change here and around the world. It is now recognised that the political pressure exerted on South Africa, particularly from close trade partners, was essential in ending apartheid, in the last country in Africa under white minority rule. It is my belief that a similar situation has arisen in the world today. An Uncivil Union? Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Merger to Go Ahead Despite Opposition11/3/2021
Issue 2, Volume 19
Matthew Harper-Gomm With the Morrison government’s federal court structural reform bill receiving royal assent on the 1st of March, a separate Family Court and Federal Circuit Court are set to become a thing of the past, with the two to be merged into a single new court – the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (FCFC). The passage of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act brings to an end the 45-year history of the Family Court, first established by the Whitlam government in 1976 in the face of fierce resistance from the Liberal Opposition. Now, almost half a century later, the tables are turned with the Liberals abolishing the court and rolling it into the Federal Circuit Court in the face of strong Labor criticism. The new court will contain two divisions – Division 1 will be a continuation of the Family Court and comprise the same judges, and Division 2 will do the same for Federal Circuit Court, but both will be under the direction of a single Chief Justice and Deputy Chief Justice. The reforms in their final iteration promise a slight increase in the number of specialist judges in each division, as recently noted in a fastidiously neutral media release from the Family Court itself, but the statement also notes that the Court will continue to “seek further resources” to implement the reforms and reduce current delays and backlogs. |
Archives
April 2021
|
