2003 Essay Winner
(Click here to view winner and essay)

Each year, the Civil Justice Foundation encourages law students to contemplate the role the common law plays in the protection and enhancement of individual rights. It encourages students to submit an essay examining a specific related topic.

The Essay

The essay should be no more than 2,000 words in length. It should be submitted to:

The Civil Justice Foundation
GPO Box 1860
BRISBANE QLD 4001

Submissions need to be mailed to the above address or emailed by 31 August, 2003.

The Award

The writer of the winning essay will be awarded $500.00 cash in addition to fully paid attendance at the Australian Plaintiff Lawyers Association Annual (APLA) Convention at Hyatt Coolum Resort in October 2003.

The Essay Topic is:

In June 2002, the Federal government announced, in response to the insurance crisis, a “review” of the law of negligence with the “objective of limiting liability and quantum of damages arising from personal injury and death.”

The review committee was chaired by NSW Justice David Ipp. The committee published its report and recommendations in October 2002. It can be located at http://revofneg.treasury.gov.au/content/review2.asp

Referring to State and Federal legislation introduced and proposed in response to the Ipp report, Professor Alan Fels, Chairman of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission said in January 2003:

"Law reform is usually thought of as a progressive process. But, as current events show, it can also be regressive. Those campaigning to change the Trade Practices Act and to wind back other consumer rights ignore the basic premise that law reform should promote public welfare. It should not promote the interests of narrowly focused groups at the expense of ordinary people.

The reforms related to insurance that are being debated, and in some states introduced, include damages caps, easy liability waivers and a block on liability when there are obvious risks - even when those risks are the fault of a shoddy or reckless operator. These types of reforms transfer the costs of accidents and other damage from those best able to understand and cheaply control the risks to those least able to understand and control them. This is nether sensible nor fair.”

Do you agree with Professor Fels’ comments? Why?

Your answer should refer to several (but need not refer to all) of the topics and recommendations specifically discussed in the Ipp report.

Enquiries

Enquiries in respect of the Essay Competition and/or the Civil Justice Foundation generally can be directed to:

Tel: (07) 3210 3444
or Civil Justice Foundation Email