Tag Archives: Mosman Lawyers

Mosman Lawyers

Removal and disposal of asbestos

Asbestos fibres should never be inhaled as they may cause mesothelioma, lung cancer, asbestosis and asbestosis related pleural disease. Further information about the health effects may be found at NSW Ministry of Health.

The manufacture and supply of asbestos was banned in Australia in 2003.

Before renovating or performing maintenance work, homeowners are advised to check for asbestos. A WorkCover licenced asbestos removalist must be engaged if more than 10 square metres of bonded asbestos needs to be removed. The Local Council should be contacted in case approval is needed for the works.

WorkCover provides a factsheet, guide (Working with Asbestos) and other information on the topic.

Asbestos is a hazardous material and must be disposed of in accordance with the guidelines of the NSW Environment Protection Authority for its packaging, transportation and disposal.

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW) | 3 September 1990

ON 3 SEPTEMBER 1990, the NSW Mental Health (Forensic Procedures) Act 1990 (formerly known as the Mental Health (Criminal Procedure) Act 1990) commenced.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/mhpa1990355

The significant provisions are found in Part 3, specifically s32.

MENTAL HEALTH (FORENSIC PROVISIONS) ACT 1990 – SECT 32
Persons suffering from mental illness or condition
32 Persons suffering from mental illness or condition

(1) If, at the commencement or at any time during the course of the hearing of proceedings before a Magistrate, it appears to the Magistrate:
(a) that the defendant is (or was at the time of the alleged commission of the offence to which the proceedings relate):
(i) developmentally disabled, or

(ii) suffering from mental illness, or

(iii) suffering from a mental condition for which treatment is available in a mental health facility,
but is not a mentally ill person, and
(b) that, on an outline of the facts alleged in the proceedings or such other evidence as the Magistrate may consider relevant, it would be more appropriate to deal with the defendant in accordance with the provisions of this Part than otherwise in accordance with law,
the Magistrate may take the action set out in subsection (2) or (3).
(2) The Magistrate may do any one or more of the following:
(a) adjourn the proceedings,

(b) grant the defendant bail in accordance with the Bail Act 2013 ,

(c) make any other order that the Magistrate considers appropriate.

(3) The Magistrate may make an order dismissing the charge and discharge the defendant:
(a) into the care of a responsible person, unconditionally or subject to conditions, or

(b) on the condition that the defendant attend on a person or at a place specified by the Magistrate for assessment of the defendant’s mental condition or treatment or both, or

(c) unconditionally.

(3A) If a Magistrate suspects that a defendant subject to an order under subsection (3) may have failed to comply with a condition under that subsection, the Magistrate may, within 6 months of the order being made, call on the defendant to appear before the Magistrate.

(3B) If the defendant fails to appear, the Magistrate may:
(a) issue a warrant for the defendant’s arrest, or

(b) authorise an authorised officer within the meaning of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 to issue a warrant for the defendant’s arrest.

(3C) If, however, at the time the Magistrate proposes to call on a defendant referred to in subsection (3A) to appear before the Magistrate, the Magistrate is satisfied that the location of the defendant is unknown, the Magistrate may immediately:
(a) issue a warrant for the defendant’s arrest, or

(b) authorise an authorised officer within the meaning of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 to issue a warrant for the defendant’s arrest.

(3D) If a Magistrate discharges a defendant subject to a condition under subsection (3), and the defendant fails to comply with the condition within 6 months of the discharge, the Magistrate may deal with the charge as if the defendant had not been discharged.

(4) A decision under this section to dismiss charges against a defendant does not constitute a finding that the charges against the defendant are proven or otherwise.

(4A) A Magistrate is to state the reasons for making a decision as to whether or not a defendant should be dealt with under subsection (2) or (3).

(4B) A failure to comply with subsection (4A) does not invalidate any decision of a Magistrate under this section.

(5) The regulations may prescribe the form of an order under this section.

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Corporations Amendment (Financial Advice) Bill 2014 (Cth)

ON 2 SEPTEMBER 2014, the Corporations Amendment (Financial Advice) Bill 2014 (Cth) was introduced to the Senate.

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Chappel v Hart [1998] HCA 55 | 2 September 1998

ON 2 SEPTEMBER 1998, the High Court of Australia delivered Chappel v Hart [1998] HCA 55; 195 CLR 232; 156 ALR 517; 72 ALJR 1344 (2 September 1998).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1998/55.html

A procedure to repair a perforation of the oesophagus carried a small inherent risk of infection which could damage the plaintiff’s laryngeal nerve and voice. The patient, who suffered an infection, was not warned of these risks. It was found that had the patient been informed of the risks he would have deferred the procedure and had it performed by a more experienced surgeon.

Using the “common sense” test of causation of March v Stramare (E & M H) Pty Ltd, the High Court held that the patient’s harm was caused by the doctor’s failure to warn of risk rather than a failure with the actual care provided.

The court applied a subjective approach for determining what the patient done had the doctor not been negligent in failing to warn him of the risk.

Per Gaudron J at [32]:

“Furthermore, a defendant is not causally liable, and therefore legally responsible, for wrongful acts or omissions if those acts or omissions would not have caused the plaintiff to alter his or her course of action. Australian law has adopted a subjective theory of causation in determining whether the failure to warn would have avoided the injury suffered. The enquiry as to what the plaintiff would have done if warned is necessarily hypothetical. But if the evidence suggests that the acts of omissions of the defendant would have made no difference to the plaintiff’s course of action, the defendant has not caused the harm which the plaintiff has suffered.”

Per McHugh J at [23]:

“The question of causation is not resolved by philosophical or scientific theories of causation”

The Civil Liability Act 2002 has modified the common law position with regards to the common sense test and subjective approach to causation.


 

<a

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Cash Converters International Limited v Gray [2014] FCAFC 111

ON 1 SEPTEMBER 2014, the Federal Court of Australia delivered Cash Converters International Limited v Gray [2014] FCAFC 111 (1 September 2014).

The Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia dismissed an appeal by Cash Converters against a decision of a primary judge declining to strike out the Statement of Claim in two proceedings brought against Cash Converters alleging unconscionable and excessive loan fees. The Full Court held that the proceedings had been properly constituted.

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Report of the Royal Commission into the Home Insulation Program

ON 1 SEPTEMBER 2014, Commissioner Ian Hanger AM QC presented the Report of the Royal Commission into the Home Insulation Program.

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Class Actions in Australia

Representative or group proceedings (class actions) were introduced to Australia through the Federal Court of Australia Amendment Act 1991 (Cth) which amended the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). They have since been introduced in Victoria under the Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) and in NSW under the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW).

Most class actions are brought in the Federal Court of Australia. The court rules require the following thresholds to be met before proceedings can be commenced:

  • There must be seven or more persons bringing a claim against the same defendant(s).
  • The claims must arise out the same, similar or related circumstances.
  • The claims must give rise to at least one substantial common issue of law or fact.

Currently there are a number of class actions either under investigation on foot in Australia. Some of the more notable ones include:

ABC Learning Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Air Cargo Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Alcoa Alumina Refinery Multiple Plaintiff Action (Shine Lawyers)

Allco Shareholder Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

American Mesh Systems (AMS) Class Action (Shine Lawyers)

Arundel Suntown Tip Class Action (Shine Lawyers)

Australian Capital Reserve Class Action (Slater and Gordon)

Bank Fees Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Billabong Shareholder Class Action (Slater and Gordon)

Black Saturday Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Bladder Cancer Group Action assocated with Actos Diabetes Drug (Maurice Blackburn)

Bonsoy Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Brooklyn Park Olives (Slater and Gordon)

Cash Converters Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

CBA’s Open Advice Review Program – Commonwealth Financial Planning and Financial Wisdom Claims (Slater and Gordon)

CFA Fiskville claims (Slater and Gordon)

Class Action on behalf of people detained on Christmas Island (Maurice Blackburn)

Collingwood Park Mine Subsidence Group (Shine Lawyers)

Dan Bowl Tax Minimisation Scheme Group Action (Shine Lawyers)

DePuy ASR Hip Implants (Maurice Blackburn)

DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Class Action (Shine Lawyers)

DePuy / Johnson & Johnson Knee Replacement Class Action (Shine Lawyers)

DePuy (LCS Duofix Femoral Component) Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Elders Limited (Slater and Gordon)

Equine Influenza Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Fairbridge Farm School (Slater and Gordon)

False Imprisonment of Young People Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Financial Wisdom Class Action (Shine Lawyers)

Gladstone Harbour Disaster Representative Class Action (Shine Lawyers)

Grand Western Lodge Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Gunns Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Hastie Group (Slater and Gordon)

Hazelwood Coal Mine Fire Investigation (Maurice Blackburn)

Hepatitis C Class Action (Slater and Gordon)

Immigration Detention Claims (Slater and Gordon)

Johnson & Johnson/ Ethicon Class Action (Shine Lawyers)

Leighton Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

LM Investments Funds (Slater and Gordon)

Macquarie Equities Financial Planning Claims (Slater and Gordon)

NAB Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Newcrest Mining Ltd (ASX:NCM) Class Action (Slater and Gordon)

NSW Bushfires Class Action (Slater and Gordon)

NZ bank fees (Slater and Gordon/Play Fair on Fees)

Pacific First Mortgage Fund Claim against Minter Ellison Gold Coast (Maurice Blackburn)

Pacific First Mortgage Fund Claim against Philip Sullivan, Thomas Swan, Stephen McCormick & Ian Donaldson (Maurice Blackburn)

Perth Hills/Parkerville Bushfire (Slater and Gordon)

Prevelly-Margaret River Bushfires – November 2011 (Slater and Gordon)

Thalidomide Class Action (Slater & Gordon)

QBE Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Queensland Floods Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

River City Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Treasury Wine Estates Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Vodafone and Crazy John’s Class Action (Piper Alderman)

Workers with Intellectual Disabilities Class Action (Maurice Blackburn)

Zimmer Durom Hip Replacement Class Action (Shine Lawyers)

Lawyers

1300 00 2088

Loose-fill asbestos in North Sydney

NORTH SYDNEY COUNCIL has been advised by the Heads of Asbestos Coordinating Authorities (HACA) that some houses in the area might contain loose-filled asbestos insulation supplied by Mr Fluffy from the late 1960’s to 1979.

WorkCover is to appoint an independent investigator to identify and test properties across NSW. Identified homeowners in the North Sydney area will be offered free testing.

The council recommends those who would like to have their roof cavity inspected to engage a Licensed Asbestos Assessor or an Occupational Hygienist who remove a specimen and have it tested at a NATA accredited laboratory at a cost of between $350 and $600. Homeowners are advised to have an assessment before undertaking refurbishment works on walls, ceilings, wall sockets, cornices or sub-floor areas.

Lawyers 1300 00 2088

10/50 Vegitation Clearing

ON 1 AUGUST 2014, new laws known as the “10/50 Vegetation Clearing Legislation” were introduced to allow trees to be cleared in designated areas within New South Wales.

The Rural Fires Amendment (Vegetation Clearing) Act 2014 (NSW) amends the Rural Fires Act 1987 (NSW) to permit the owner of land in a 10/50 vegetation clearing entitlement area to:

  • Without approval, clear trees on the property within 10 metres of a home.
  • With approval, clear underlying vegetation (such as shrubs, but not trees) on the property within 50 metres of a home.

The NSW Fire Service has an online tool to work out whether or not a property is in a 10/50 Vegetation Clearing Entitlement Area.

The Rural Fire Service has produced a Code of Practice.

Lawyers

1300 00 2088

LawAccess NSW Free Legal Help 1300 888 529

ON 1 SEPTEMBER 2014, the NSW Attorney General Brad Hazzard announced that LawAccess, the NSW free legal information service, , has taken 2 million calls since its establishment in September 2001.

LawAccess is a partnership between the Department of Justice, Legal Aid NSW, Law Society of NSW and the NSW Bar Association. It is available to everyone in New South Wales.

LAwAccess can be contacted on 1300 888 529 or www.lawaccess.nsw.gov.au.

Common enquiries to LawAccess include family law child arrangements, debt, domestic violence, neighbourhood disputes, wills and divorce.

Since 2010, LawAccess has operated LawAssist, a website for people who represent themselves in courts and tribunals. More than 1.2 million people have visited that site since 2010.

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088