Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The high price of justice

By Nicholas Gruen - posted Friday, 29 August 2008


It highlights the poverty of data on which to make sound decisions. But it’s too much the creature of the legal culture it’s trying to tackle. Its proposed Civil Justice Council which would carry much of the future agenda is a specialist stakeholder body, an unlikely driver of substantial micro-economic reform. And there’s no recommendation to experiment - perhaps in some specialised court - with a truly inquisitorial process like Europe’s civil law system or our own Royal Commissions where the judge is chief investigator, not the umpire between legal opponents.

And where UK courts now charge for their time - with discretion to publicly fund to avoid hardship - the Victorian report shies away from anything so bold. I hope some enterprising State or Federal Treasurer understands what easy pickings this could make for their next razor gang.

To quote one commentator reviewing the Woolf reforms, delivering true proportionality "seems unlikely without a much more fundamental reform, such as moving away from the adversarial system”.

Advertisement

In fact civil law systems have problems too so they’re no panacea on their own. We need to search for a felicitous hybrid that melds the best of both systems - a subject for another column.

Meanwhile back in England, pity poor Max Mosley having a quiet S&M night with five friendly prostitutes. (He’s the high profile son of Oswald Mosley, British Fascist leader and Diana Mitford. Hitler attended their 1936 wedding.) Max was secretly videotaped by News of the World. He won £60,000 damages for invasion of privacy.

But even though the basic evidence - the tape and newspaper article - was already public, the costs of both sides still came to 14 times the damages or nearly £1 million.

So much for proportionality in post-Woolf England.

And so much for your rights to privacy if you don’t have a million odd to wager.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

First published by the Australian Financial Review on August 26, 2008.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

4 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Dr Nicholas Gruen is CEO of Lateral Economics and Chairman of Peach Refund Mortgage Broker. He is working on a book entitled Reimagining Economic Reform.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Nicholas Gruen

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Nicholas Gruen
Article Tools
Comment 4 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy