The Jurist - The Animal Edition - Issue Two 2016 by Flinders Law Students' Association

THE JURIST

The Animal Edition Issue 2 2016

The Jurist

Contents Walking for justice by Philippa Ewens The next great social justice movement by Sarah Margo A fierce advocate for companion animals by Giulia Prosperi-Porta Law Ball 2016 by Kelly Stephenson How to effectively deal with exams

4 7 12 16 21 22 28 35 36 40 42

The Jurist

Message from the Dean by Professor Kim Economides

Tania Leiman’s law journey by Audrey Lian Australia’s inaugural Animal Law Week by Luisa Consiglio Moot your way to the top by Robbie Peschel How to buy a politician by Sara Saad Sarah Gates’ first novel hits the shelves in July

Message from the Dean the challenge by searching for practical answers and better solutions via law reform. We do this through studying, researching, campaigning and, in other ways, applying our legal skills and knowledge – and knowledge about law - in furtherance of access to justice.

By Professor Kim Economides THIS latest issue of The Jurist looks at a number of marginal, though by no means minority, interests that frequently fail to be heard or receive adequate representation in our legal system. This may be because, as with animals and the environment, they traditionally have no voice, or standing, before the courts and therefore these interests – if they are to be heard - are entirely dependent on the imagination, altruism and surrogate advocacy of those with a social conscience. Others, such as women and Indigenous peoples, may to some extent be able to voice their own concerns and aspirations, having won the formal right to representation, and yet still be effectively excluded when it comes to accessing legal resources and decision-making. A pressing challenge for any modern legal system is to work out how to listen, and respond to, latent and unarticulated interests that tend to remain silent; while also moderating the claims of more powerful and vocal groups that frequently dominate and displace weaker, but no less important, legal claims. The legitimacy of the legal

system, let alone its moral authority, is heavily dependent on its capacity to remain inclusive and open to a wide range of interests, and not to be captured by powerful groups that may wish the common law to become the exclusive preserve of the wealthy. Legal aid has provided the principal means for excluded groups and marginal interests to access lawyers and the legal system but in recent years almost everywhere this has been cut. New ways therefore need to be found to both hear and represent the legal claims of those who remain vulnerable and excluded. I like to think that all students and staff at Flinders Law School not only understand the importance of challenging shortcomings of our legal system but also actively seek to meet The Jurist

Students at Flinders Law School clearly understand the practical and theoretical importance of all of this. It was enormously gratifying to see our students winning trophies for the Highest Fundraising Team and Highest Fundraising Student at the Walk for Justice 2016, on top of winning last year’s Australia-NZ ANIMAL 2015 moot on animal law. As I write, Flinders has launched its new, ambitious vision for the future: ‘To be internationally recognised as a world leader in research, an innovator in contemporary education and the source of Australia’s most enterprising graduates’, with a mission of changing lives and changing the world ( see 2025.flinders.edu. au). While we should not be complacent, all of us should be proud of the traditions and values on which our School is built and I have little doubt that our graduates will contribute if not lead significant social and legal change by working for a more inclusive and just society.

THIS issue of The Jurist is all about the animals. It comes after Australia’s inaugural Animal Law Week in April and as Flinders University gets set to host ANIMAL 2016 in September – the Australia New Zealand Intervarsity Moot on Animal Law. As Sarah Margo from Voiceless, the animal protection institute explains, animal law is a growing area of law which deserves much attention. She writes animal law is the ‘next great social justice movement’, and argues the law fails in classifying animals as property, as it leads to their continued mistreatment. This controversial notion is highlighted in my article about Lawyers for Companion Animals Principal, Anne Greenaway, in which she talks about a case in which she had the job of fervently arguing the dog in question was a sentient being. With a federal election just around the corner, Flinders Animal Law lecturer Aaron Timoshanko encourages animal-loving students to inform themselves and use the political process to attain positive outcomes for animals. Issue Two of The Jurist also includes everything from an in-depth analysis and opinion about the Royal Commission

Editorial

‘‘

ADORABLE: A dog makes friends with some monkeys.

The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. I hold that the more helpless a creature, the more entitled it is to protection by man from the cruelty of mankind - Mahatma Gandhi

into Trade Union Governance, how to deal with exams, to Law Ball action. Speaking of exams, The Jurist team wishes students the best of luck with their midyear finals. Be sure to read Audrey Lian’s article containing unique suggestions for mid-year break fun. I highly recommend the ‘dessert bar crawl’, during which you must

experience the Peanut Butter Brownie Milkshake from St Louis, or a Funnel Cake from San Churros. Whatever you choose to enjoy over the break, make sure it helps you switch off and rejuvenate, ready for the last half of the year. Giulia Prosperi-Porta Editor-in-Chief

The Jurist would like to thank Voiceless, the animal protection institute, The Animal Law Institute, Lawyers for Companion Animals and Aaron Timoshanko for their contributions to The Animal Edition. The Jurist

Walking for justice

CHEF KOURAKIS: Chief Justice Kourakis serves breakfast to the hungry Walk for Justice participants.

Pictures: Brayden Mann

A GOOD MORNING: Ann Thomas, Philippa Ewens and HUNGRY: Anthony Busuttil, Hannah Brimstone, Georgia Hagias, Bimaya De Silva and Adam Hamilton get ready to tuck in. Adam Hamilton pound the pavement.

The Jurist

WINNERS: Flinders law students proudly display the Walk for Justice University Shield for the highest fundraising university team.

Walking for justice JusticeNet is a not-for-profit service that provides probono legal assistance to low FLINDERS has taken home the income and disadvantaged Walk for Justice University Shield South Australians. As it is an for the highest fundraising team independent body, its funding out of the three SA universities, comes from membership for the second year running. contributions, government and philanthropic grants, private FLSA raised $2630 through donations and fundraising, of sponsorship of team members which the Walk for Justice is and a bake sale held on their annual flagship event. campus.

By Philippa Ewens

Flinders student Nick Salagaras won the award for the highest fundraising university student for raising $1400. On May 17 FLSA joined a group of about 600 law students and members of the legal profession in the Walk for Justice, to raise money for Justice Net SA.

About 25 students from Flinders gathered on North Terrace at 7.30am to join in the 5km walk. The group ventured through the Botanic Gardens, past the Adelaide Oval, across the footbridge and back down King William Street ending at Victoria Square. Once in the square, walkers were served a delicious hot breakfast from recognisable faces including The Jurist

Chief Justice Kourakis and Nick Xenophon. The Walk for Justice 2015 raised a much-needed near $50,000 for JusticeNet. We encourage students to continue their support of JusticeNet as the year progresses. Donations (tax deductible) can be made all year round via its website: www. justicenet.org.au. If you are interested in community legal services, JusticeNet also accepts applications from law student volunteers year round, and open positions on an asneeded basis. To apply, students can send a cover letter, CV and academic transcript to Louise Young at admin@justicenet.org.au.

The Trade Union Royal Commission By Jimmy Coffey THE Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption report, released 28 December 2015, is a six-volume condemnation of criminal conduct in the labour movement and outline for reform Australia wide. After 21 months of the Royal Commission’s existence, which consisted of 155 days of public hearings, 46 days of private hearings, evidence from 505 individual witnesses, and 2000 sent notices to produce documents, the Royal Commissioner and former High Court Justice Dyson Heydon AC QC has identified four key issues pertaining to the conduct of offending individuals and organisations.

1. Propensity to produce false records The first is a propensity to produce false records in order to cover up illegitimate financial transactions. These include large payments disguised as false invoices made by Theiss John Holland to the Australian Workers’ Union (AWU), and payments made by an employer to a union that were invoiced as payments for training which never actually took place. This issue is also present in the failure to maintain adequate records or even the deliberate destruction of them. An example of this is the removal and destruction of a ‘number of tonnes’ of documents from the Brisbane office of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) on the day they received notice

from the Commission to produce documents. Another failure was the conduct of then Health Services Union (HSU) President Michael Williamson who, as a result of the findings of the Commission, has been convicted and imprisoned for defrauding the HSU and hindering a police investigation. Without a complete set of clear and accurate records, it is impossible for the union to be transparent about its activities.

2. Lack of authority for scrutiny The second issue is the lack of will among union committees of management to exercise their authority over union officials and give appropriate scrutiny to their use of union resources. The members of these committees of management are not paid for their time and are either engaged in full-time work elsewhere or are retired.

undeclared payments of large sums of money to unions. These are often disguised as false invoices and without any accompanying documentation. The declared purpose of these payments is often vague or lacking in detail, and remain undisclosed to the union’s members. Often, these payments are made by employers to unions in exchange for agreements which disadvantage workers. The report cites large yearly payments made by Cleanevent to the Victorian AWU for the purpose of discouraging the union from seeking better working conditions for Cleanevent employees. The exposure of this deal lead to the Commission calling Opposition Leader Bill Shorten to answer questions about his involvement with the actions of AWU and individuals involved with it. At the time these deals took place, Shorten was the President of the AWU. Aside from the failure to declare a large donation to his parliamentary election campaign in 2007, and despite having his credibility as a witness called into question by the Commissioner, Shorten himself was cleared by the Commission of any wrongdoing or complicity. Despite being cleared of any direct criminal wrongdoing on his part, the mere fact that Shorten presided over the AWU during a time when corrupt dealings were taking place may cost votes; a more valuable asset at election time than money.

Considering this, it is unsurprising that many of these committees lack the proper motivation to ensure certain union officials, such as Kathy Jackson or Craig Thompson, do not abuse their position by using union funds inappropriately. Thomson and Jackson have both been found guilty of misusing large sums of HSU money to fund personal expenses. With reference to the management committees whose job it is to monitor how officials spend union members’ money, Heydon put it best when he said, “its members must learn to use two words more. One is ‘Why?’ and the 4. Inflated membership numbers other is ‘No’”. The fourth issue is the false inflation 3. Undeclared payments of membership numbers. Rather The third issue is employers’ than for any financial gain, this is The Jurist

The Trade Union Royal Commission done to inflate a union’s political To be clear, the accusation here was not that Heydon was actually influence. The TWU fabricated membership biased, rather they relied on the test numbers in order to increase its set out in Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy in which the High Court voting power at the Labor Annual ruled that “... a judge is disqualified Conference. The most common if a fair-minded lay observer might way of inflating membership reasonably apprehend that the numbers is to add people to the judge might not bring an impartial register without their knowledge or mind to the resolution of the consent. There is even a case of question the judge is required to an individual being counted as a decide.” member after expressly refusing to In his decision to dismiss the join the union. application for his own dismissal, The picture painted by the Royal Heydon held the “fair-minded Commission is a bleak one for reasonable person” would, even unions and the labour movement. without extensive legal knowledge It has the potential to inflict lasting and training, be bound to make her political damage, so it is hardly or his decision with full knowledge surprising that the unions and senior of all the relevant facts, including Labor Party figures have attempted the fact that he’d been assured to cast doubt on the validity of the by the organiser that it was not a Commission’s findings. Liberal Party fundraiser, and that his speech at the event and the topics Labor accusations of discussion for the evening had When it was revealed Royal nothing to do with spreading the Commissioner Dyson Heydon had ideals of the Liberal party or raising accepted an invitation to speak at funds given that funds contributed a Liberal Party hosted event, Labor by attendees were merely to cover and the unions described it as a the cost of the event itself. The centre partisan fundraiser. of Heydon’s defence was that the Tony Burke rather dramatically political views of the organisers proclaimed in Parliament: “He and audience of the speech was [Heydon] is conflicted! He is biased! irrelevant as the speech and dinner The Royal Commission is farce!” The was not an exclusive Liberal event, essence of this statement quickly was unrelated to the Commission became the standard attitude and Heydon only intended to give for many of the people within the the speech in the event that the labour movement. There were Royal Commission had concluded calls for Heydon’s dismissal and by that time. the termination of the entire Royal The unions did not attempt Commission. Formal submissions to an appeal of Heydon’s decision the Commission were made for this against their motion to have him on the grounds of apprehended disqualified, so the Commission was bias. free to continue its regular business, The Jurist

including its recommendations for law reform affecting the unions.

Commission’s recommendations Among the recommendations for reform in volume 5 of the report is that the transfer of oversight of unions should be moved from the Fair Work Commission to a new independent body; the Government’s proposed Registered Organisations Commission. This new body would have increased power to investigate a union’s records and finances, enforce greater penalties against officials for providing false or misleading statements or information, increased investigative powers to ensure compliance with the law. There are also numerous recommendations by the Royal Commission to increase safeguards against corruption within the organisations themselves, such as financial compliance officers working for the unions. The final report of the Royal Commission has, over the course of its inquiries, uncovered serious and widespread criminal acts committed by the people whom were trusted by the union members to act in their best interests and spend their money responsibly. A sense of entitlement among these officials has been allowed to entrench itself due largely to a lack of real oversight from union management or from government. Even though the behaviour of the Royal Commissioner has led cynicism about the Commission’s motives, the facts uncovered should not be disregarded on that basis.

Opinion: The Royal Commission By Sean Lamonby THE Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption (TURC) was a farcical excuse of a royal commission. Established by the Abbott Coalition Government in 2014 to investigate alleged financial irregularities and misconduct within trade unions, the TURC has spent 52 million dollars in a crusade against unionism and achieved almost nothing. The creation of the commission was blatantly aimed at weakening the trade union movement in Australia, and an attempt to attack and discredit several Labor politicians.

Bias, instability and lies It is clear to see that the TURC was fraught with instability in its entirety. Unionism and union

membership raises the wages and living conditions of the working class in Australia, which supposedly takes money out of various big and small business owners’ pockets. As business owners’ interests lie as deep as Excalibur itself within the hearts of right-wing politicians in Australia, it comes as no great surprise that the Coalition Government in Australia can be expected to possess antiunion sentiments. What did come as a surprise to those interested in the royal commission, was the appointment of former High Court judge, Dyson Heydon. Justice Heydon was found to have clear ties with the Liberal Party of Australia. Justice Heydon accepted an invitation, while the Commission was in its midst, to be a keynote speaker at a New South Wales Liberal fundraiser. Perhaps when Heydon stated The Jurist

in his opening remarks to the Commission that it was not the aim of the Commission to abolish trade unions, but rather to ensure they function within the law, he wasn’t being entirely truthful. Perhaps it was not the aim of the Commission itself, but the aim of the Liberal Party which appointed an ideological ally to conduct the Commission in a way that was fruitful for their motives. Justice Heydon used his computer illiteracy as an excuse for overlooking the fact it was a political event.

Unions’ fight for Australians Within most organisations, there is going to be a vast majority of workers who are honest, who toil hard for the cause of their organisation, and who are good people at heart. There are also going to

into Trade Union Governance be people who abuse positions of power. However, this does not mean the workplace itself is corrupt, rather the individual who is committing the crime. Australians are some of the best-paid workers with the best conditions in the world. This is because union officials fight tooth and nail to protect their entitlements and help them make it home safely every day. There are still companies that refuse site access for union officials or slander the union in front of their staff in order to weaken their collective power. We recently saw the scandal of 7/11 underpaying, harassing and mistreating their workers with absolutely no recourse. Worker exploitation is alive and well.

Wrongdoing within unions It is undeniable that there has been some wrongdoing

in the union movement. Kathy Jackson, the former secretary of the Health Services Union, stole member funds to pay for her lifestyle. Her partner Michael Lawler abused his position with the Fair Work Commission to help his friends with legal advice. The actions of people who have abused their positions and betrayed those they represent cannot be used to try and stop the union doing their job. Criminals must be prosecuted and a Shorten Labor Government will legislate to ensure that if you betray the trust of your members, you will face the full extent of the law. Labor promises to give the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) extra powers to root out legitimate corruption in the union movement. This is the right way to tackle corruption, not a politically motivated agenda that isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t worth the 52 The Jurist

million dollars spent on it.

Royal Commission conclusion After 18 months, 505 witnesses called to the stand, and 52 million dollars of taxpayersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; money, the royal commission conclusions are still somewhat unclear. It came as very little surprise to those familiar with trade unionism in Australia, that when Justice Heydon submitted his findings in December last year, there was a relatively minute amount of actual corruption. As the rule goes, if you were to look under one thousand rocks, you will find a spider or two. We need the union movement in Australia, to keep those at the top end of town honest, and to ensure that those on the other side of the fence enjoy a slice of the lucky countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s cake of wealth and prosperity.

Tania Leiman’s law journey TANIA Leiman is Associate Dean (Teaching and Learning) at Flinders Law School. She was also a supervising solicitor in the Flinders Legal Advice Clinic from 2012 until earlier this year, and Director of First Year Studies from 2010 until 30 June 2016. She currently teaches Torts 1 and 2, and has continuing oversight responsibilities in the Flinders Legal Advice Clinic. Tania sat down with The Jurist’s Audrey Lian to talk about how she got into law, how practice differs from university, and the challenges lawyers face in a rapidly changing societal envi- lawyers are often the leaders. So if I can put any little bit of ronment. positive influence into our students who will be the leaders Why did you choose a career of tomorrow, that is what I want to be doing. in law? Well, there is a short answer and a long answer. The short answer is that I wanted to help people. The long answer is that, as a Christian, I felt a sense of calling and vocation, even though at the time I chose to study law, I wasn’t sure where that might lead. In December this year I celebrate 30 years since my admission to legal practice, and looking back, I can recognise that all of my varied experiences in the law have equipped me for where I am now – sometimes in very unexpected ways. My driving purpose is to invest in developing leaders for the future. And

intense, almost overwhelming. In practice, you have a responsibility to get things right. You know that people are depending on you. You have a responsibility to do your very best for your clients.

You mentioned the high level of responsibility attached to working in law. When first entering practice, do new lawyers have some breathing room? Is it okay to make mistakes?

When you first get admitted, you are required to be supervised for two years. Make the most of your supervision – ask questions, seek advice, learn all you can, look for professional mentors. Part of being a successful lawyer means paying attention to detail to the proWhat surprised you the most cess, and to all the little steps about practising law after that appear annoying but are actually safeguards. Don’t cut studying it at university? When I left university, I corners - what you may think is thought I knew a whole lot, only a small mistake may acbut at the end of the first day tually be a big mistake. in the practice I realised just how little I did know. When I What do you enjoy most about left practice after a number working in your field of law? of years to have my children, I believe that knowing about I felt confident in my knowl- the law is amazingly empoweredge and capacity as a solic- ing. Even as law students, you itor. I taught law sessionally for often do not understand how 16 years, but when I returned much knowledge you have. to practice part-time in 2010, I Knowledge really is power. went into an area of practice With this knowledge, we have that I had never worked in be- the ability to help empower fore. The learning curve was people to make their own deThe Jurist

cisions about what they do, how they protect their rights, manage things, and how they deal with issues now that they have the information. There are so many interesting and quirky things happening in the area of tort law! Hopefully, Torts 1 and Torts 2 students have been able to catch a glimpse of this in my lectures. I am really interested in the dynamic changes currently happening within the legal services sector and more broadly – such as artificial intelligence, the Internet of things, disruptive innovation. I am working with industry researching the legal impacts of autonomous vehicles. These are very exciting times to be a lawyer with lots of new opportunities that have never existed previously.

What is a challenging aspect about working in law?

Keeping up with all the new decisions and developments in the law. It can be challenging reading long judgements and coming to grips with really esoteric legal details. The law entails life-long learning. Thinking about where the future is going to take the legal system, legal profession and legal education is a very exciting challenge ahead for all of us – and one that takes us out of the comfort zone of the discipline of law. It can be challenging to manage the emotional load of responsibility to clients in what can sometimes be traumatic or conflict-filled situations, to practice good stress management and self-

care, and to never lose sight of the impact of legal decisions (and the advice you give) on human beings. Every now and then, make sure you take a step back and look at the big picture – why are you doing what you’re doing? Do you have a purpose that sustains you? Are you making a positive difference?

other relevant disciplines. Get involved with not-for-profit groups and in the wider community!

What if smaller law firms or legal centres do not have the funds to spend on legal resources?

Lawyers can use the Supreme Court library or Austlii for free. Firms need to determine So is the onus on lawyers to how much they can afford to keep up with developments? spend on legal resources and data management. These are increasingly critical decisions for firms and will only get more Even as law stucritical in the digital age as we dents, you often do move from an oil-powered society to a data-powered socinot understand how ety.

‘‘

much knowledge you have. Knowledge really is power

Absolutely the onus is on you. Read/watch/listen to the news. Subscribe to online bulletins such as those put out by the online databases and the Law Society, Lawyers Weekly, the High Court, etc. Many of these are free. Keep your LinkedIn profile up to date and follow legal groups there. Join legal and relevant professional associations. Follow legal blogs. I find Twitter really helpful in keeping me up to date with developments in technology in the legal sector. Attend continuing professional development seminars put on by the Law Society or other legal providers. Connect with other lawyers and professionals and build your networks. Look to build links with colleagues in The Jurist

What advice do you have for students who want to succeed in your topics?

I’d like to invite my students to come with me on a learnring journey. I know students make choices about how much effort they want to expend in studying but that also means taking responsibility for their own actions. I have high expectations, but I give people lots of support. If students want to reach for the sky, I will be there to support them.

When not doing anything law-related what can you be found doing? I can be found walking my dog! I’m involved in my church community. I love being outside, gardening, painting very large abstract works, watching my sons play sport and listening to history podcasts.

Where do we want to be in five years? By Emily Rutherford

Women Lawyers’ Association of South Australia “WE need to stop buying into the myth about gender equality. It isn’t a reality yet. But unless women and men both say this is unacceptable, things will not change. Men have to demand that their wives, daughters, mothers, and sisters earn more commensurate with their qualifications and not their gender. Equality will be achieved when men and women are granted equal pay and equal respect.” A barrister quoting Beyonce while reporting on the National Attrition and Reengagement Survey (NARS) was not something I expected to hear at the Australian Women Lawyers’ (AWL) conference. But then, I’m not sure what I really expected when I answered the call out for expressions of interest for sponsorship to attend the Australian Women Lawyers’ National Conference in Perth from 8 – 10 April 2016. Rather than just griping about the state of affairs, the focus of the AWL conference was to address where we as a profession want to be in five years, and how we can get there. The following are the top messages that have stuck with

INSPIRING WOMEN: Amy Challans, Emily Rutherford and Leah Marrone of WLASA with Hon Robyn Layton AO QC (centre) and Senator Penny Wong.

me from the conference:

pay and equity for women 1. Women should not feel in the legal profession, or to pressure to “have it all” when “it “maintain the rage” as per all” hasn’t been defined by us. Senator Penny Wong’s call. I encourage students to 2. The career pathways of female members of the read the materials on the Law judiciary tend to be far more Society’s page on gender diverse than those of their equity and the website of the male counterparts, and this is Women Lawyers’ Association of South Australia (www. something to be celebrated. womenlawyerssa.org.au), 3. It is not enough for a greater and to consider attending the number of female individuals to 2018 national conference in work their way through the ranks Sydney. to achieve high levels if we are Law students should not improving the profession as consider joining the Women a whole for women. Lawyers’ Association of South 4. Change occurs when the Australia for opportunities such leaders become emotional as attending conferences supporters of a cause. and events, for networking I left the AWL Conference opportunities, and to expose feeling inspired and energised themselves to female lawyers to be a part of the nationwide who can mentor and guide efforts to improve conditions, them through the profession. The Jurist

Giving a Voice to the Voiceless

“Animals are not ‘property’ or ‘things’ but rather living organisms, subjects of a life, who are worthy of our compassion, respect, friendship, and support”

The Jurist 2016 Animal Edition Feature The Jurist

The next great social By Sarah Margo Voiceless, the animal protection institute, Junior Counsel ANIMAL law is on the rise. As public awareness of and concern for animal protection continues to grow, so too does the number of universities and practitioners turning their focus to the discipline of animal law. In many respects, the proper treatment of animals is the next great social justice movement, and one that must be properly enshrined in law. Every day, animals suffer at the hands of humans. This suffering occurs in the course of providing our food, clothes, cosmetics or entertainment; furthering our scientific knowledge or curiosity; conserving native fauna and flora, or preserving our religious or cultural norms. At Voiceless, the animal protection institute, we focus on alleviating the suffering of animals in factory farming and the commercial kangaroo industry. Each year in Australia, 600 million animals are subject to the cruel realities of factory farming, such as egg laying hens confined in battery cages, pregnant pigs confined in sow stalls, and the slaughter of day old bobby calves for dairy production. Animals have their teeth, tails, horns, ears, beaks and testicles removed to better fit within these unnatural production systems, all of which can legally be performed without pain relief. Such is the harsh reality of mod-

ABOVE: Sarah Margo, Junior Counsel at Voiceless.

ern animal agriculture. Societies justify animal exploitation on the bases of economics, culture, politics or human dominion over all other living species. This justification is facilitated – if not actively perpetuated – by existing legal paradigms, as it is the law that permits animal suffering. In Voiceless’ view, law reform is essential to bring this suffering to an end.

al interests, which leads to their continued abuse and exploitation. Significantly, the property status of animals does not reflect the overwhelming scientific consensus that animals are sentient beings, with the capacity to think, have preferences, and importantly, to feel pleasure and pain. Personhood determines who counts in the eyes of the law. Only legal persons have the capacity to bear legal rights, and as such, many animal lawyers argue that animals must be grantOne of the fundamental failed legal personhood to properings of the law is its relegation of ly acknowledge and protect animals to the status of property. their intrinsic value. As property, animals are classiPersonhood for animals is cerfied as ‘things’ with no person- tainly possible, as not all legal

Animals and law

The Jurist

justice movement

HARD-HITTING: Voiceless’ main focus is animals in factory farming.

persons are human. For example, nonhuman entities such as corporations, partner ships, religious texts and ships have been granted legal personhood for various purposes. Furthermore, the elevation from property to legal persons has been historically achieved on behalf of human slaves, women and children. Each of these lauded social justice movements fought for a group that was disenfranchised on account of an arbitrary distinction – whether it be their gender, race or age. Animal advocates argue that differential treatment of another sentient being on the basis of their species is yet another arbitrary and unjustifiable basis for discrimination. ‘Speciesism’, akin to racism or sexism, is a term used to describe this prejudice against nonhuman animals. Membership of a given species is an entirely improper and irrelevant deter-

minant of moral significance. As our understanding of animal behaviour and intelligence has increased, so too has the acceptance in the scientific community that animals are sentient creatures who should be able to live free from suffering and abuse.

Paving the way One particular organisation is making headway in the fight to establish animal legal personhood. The Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP), headed by animal lawyer Steven Wise, has developed a similar legal argument to that which successfully liberated human slaves in the United Kingdom. Relying on the common law writ of habeas corpus, the NhRP claims that certain species of animals have complex cognitive abilities which are sufficient to establish legal personhood for The Jurist

the purposes of petitioning for their freedom from detention. The NhRP draws on decades of scientific research to prove the complex cognitive abilities of the Great Apes, elephants and cetaceans, and has already brought proceedings in American courts on behalf of a number of chimpanzee plaintiffs. While each case has received varying responses, the work of the NhRP is groundbreaking in paving a path to overcoming speciesism. Unfortunately, we live in an era where more animals are suffering than ever before. Action taken today will shape the future of Animal Law and as the movement gathers momentum, now is the time for law students, academics and practitioners to harness the opportunity to be at the forefront of the next great social justice movement. Voiceless believes the law is a driving force for change. We fight for stronger legal protections for animals, for tougher penalties for animal cruelty, and for a greater level of enforcement of animal protection laws. Most importantly, Voiceless works to educate the public, to lift the veil of secrecy that currently shrouds animal production in this country, and to challenge existing societal norms and expectations. Voiceless, the animal protection institute, is an independent, non-profit think tank. Find out more at www.voiceless.org.au.

Make your vote in July By Aaron Timoshanko Flinders Animal Law Topic Co-ordinator IT is a privilege to write a piece for the Animal Law edition of the Jurist. When I was an undergrad (collective eye roll), Flinders was one of the few progressive law schools in Australia to offer Animal Law as a topic. Now 14 law schools across Australia regularly offer Animal Law as an elective. The very fact that the Jurist is dedicating an edition to Animal Law is further testament to the growing awareness and interest in the topic. I have been interested in Animal Law since 2009, when I attended my first Animal Law lecture series run by Voiceless, the Animal Protection Institute. I had always considered myself an animal lover, having had a childhood filled with countless companion animals. So I went to the lecture curious to find out more about this emerging branch of law. I learnt that Animal Law was not a distinct area of law, but rather an amalgamation of all other areas of law that effect the interests of animals. From Administrative Law, Contract Law, Family Law and Criminal Law; the breadth of Animal Law reflects the diverse ways animals’ lives are intertwined with our own. At the Voiceless lecture (which is an annual event) I was shocked to dis-

Best friends: Animal Law Topic Co-ordinator/lecturer Aaron Timoshanko with his dog Summer.

cover that animals were not as well-protected by the law as I had assumed they were. That realisation continued to bother me days and weeks after the lecture. I had no idea that producers of the meat, milk, eggs, leather, wool and other animal products I consumed were able to perform procedures on animals that would see me prosecuted by the RSPCA if I did the same to one of my pets. If all mammals over one-year-old are sentient (have the capacity to feel pleasure and pain), what is the difference between a dog’s pain and a cow’s pain? Pain is pain, is it not? The more I researched the more troubled I became. There appeared to me to be a void between the knowledge and expectations of consumers of animal products and how the The Jurist

animals were able to be treated under the law. I decided to commence a PhD in Animal Law so I could one day teach Animal Law at university.

Animal Law at Flinders In 2015 my goal was realised when I taught LLAW3268 Animal Law as a summer intensive. The course was spilt into two components: theory and application. Not original, I know, but why reinvent the wheel? The topic began by discussing the theories of animal ethics (animal welfare, animal rights, utilitarianism, the principle of equal consideration, abolition and cruelty) and the major scholars in this area. This lays the groundwork for an in depth analysis

count for the animals

CHAMPIONS: The winning Flinders ANIMAL 2015 team Riana, Philippa Ewens, Coach Aaron Timoshanko and Nytiaini Rianhindren following their victory in Melbourne.

of the current animal welfare paradigm and jurisprudential challenges facing animal law, such as the property status of animals and legal personhood. The topic then considers how these concepts effect the regulation of animals in specific areas. Every jurisdictional level is considered. From whaling, live export and WTO trade restrictions on animal products at the international level, to the regulation of companion animals at the local government level. As the regulation of animals is primarily State-based, students gain a detailed understanding of the Animal Welfare Act 1985 (SA) and the effect codes of practice have on the protections under section 13. This knowledge is given practical

application through a smallgroup exercise that requires students to adopt the role of RSPCA Prosecutors and review footage from inside South Australian piggeries.

ANIMAL 2015 Teaching Animal Law also afforded me the opportunity to coach the team from Flinders that competed in the Australia New Zealand Intervarsity Moot on Animal Law (ANIMAL). This is an annual mooting competition run by The Animal Law Institute (ALI. org.au). I would encourage anyone interested in Animal Law, or mooting generally, to contact the organisers so they can put you in touch with other interested students from Flinders to form a team. As The Jurist

last year’s champions, (Riana Cermak, Philipa Ewens, Nytia Rajanhindren), we defend the trophy on ‘home soil’ with ANIMAL being hosted at Flinders Law School on 17-18 September. For more information see http://www.ali.org.au/ events/2016/9/17/animal-2016. This special Animal Law edition of the Jurist has come at a poignant time. The first national Animal Law Week was held a few months ago. Registrations for ANIMAL are still open, and this year’s Voiceless Animal Law lecture series has just concluded. This year’s speaker was Ms Marianne Thieme, who is a lawyer and founder of the world’s first political party aimed at better protecting the interests of animals. Ms Thieme spoke to audiences around Australia about how to use the political process to achieve positive change for animals. With the Australian Federal election fast approaching (2 June) this is your opportunity to exercise your power as a citizen to shape the political and legal landscape of Australia for the next three years.

Get educated

Inform yourself about the issues that matter to you and research each of the political parties’ policies on these issues. Utilise those invaluable research and critical thinking skills you have developed

POLITICAL ANIMALS: Voiceless, the animal protection institute is campaigning for animal welfare.

Make your vote in July count for the animals

(and continue to do so) at Flinders Law School in a real-life and meaningful way. Parties may not have this information on their website (or in insufficient detail), so contact your local MP and ask what their stance is on a particular issue. Or, write to express your support or disapproval of their stance (or their party’s). If you have been troubled by the footage of the live animal export industry, such as the Four Corners’ exposé A Bloody Business, then write to your local Federal MP and ask what are they going to do about your concerns. Or, maybe you have been concerned about the new national standard for freerange egg labelling that now means producers only have to provide meaningful and regular access to an outdoor range, with a stocking density of up to

‘‘

Whatever the issue, engage in the political process. Our democracy needs educated people like yourself to care

10 000 birds per hectare (under the Model Code of Practice this was 1 500 birds per hectare). Finally, you may urge your MP to support the establishment of an Independent Office of Animal Welfare to resolve the conflict of interest the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has in promoting a profitable animal agricultural industry whilst also tasked with The Jurist

ensuring the welfare of the animals involved. There is a plethora of other issues, animal and non-animal related, that you may feel need to be addressed. Now is the time to put them on the Government’s agenda. Politicians, if they want to be re-elected, need to represent the views of their constituents. For the democratic process to work you need to tell your local MP what issues you care about. Don’t just whine on Facebook or sign an online petition (although they have a role to play). Write a letter and snail-mail it, then your MP has to respond. Because posting a letter takes more effort (only by a bit), it carries greater weight. Whatever the issue, engage in the political process. Our democracy needs educated people like yourself to care.

Australia’s Inaugural Animal Law Week

INFLUENTIAL: Rachel Shaw speaks about a day in the life of an animal lawyer.

By Luisa Consiglio Animal Law Institute Director of Community Engagement THE Animal Law Institute (ALI) is a community legal centre that is dedicated to protecting animals and advocating for their interests through the Australian legal system. This year, ALI hosted Australia’s first Animal Law Week, during which 150 people attended various events across Australia during April. Animal Law Week brought together legal professionals and experts to facilitate discussions on the most pressing animal law issues, and what must be changed to achieve a just world for animals. In Adelaide Rachel Shaw spoke about the day in the life of an animal lawyer. Ra-

chel spoke about her role as co-chair of the SA Animal Law Committee and her work in advising the RSPCA in relation to its prosecution of animal cruelty offences. In Sydney Emmanuel Giuffre of Voiceless spoke about labelling laws surrounding food products and how the current laws fail to protect animals, and can lead to misleading consumers. Katinka Day from Choice spoke specifically about the issues surrounding free range egg labelling, Choice’s campaign regarding the issue, and the need for an information standard for eggs labelled as free range. On the Gold Coast international guest speaker Lora Dunn of the Animal Legal Defence Fund spoke about her work in the prosecution of animal crimes. Lora gave an insight into the criminal animal legislation, The Jurist

how an ‘animal’ is defined and the procedural requirements of prosecution work, such as search and seizure, warrants and the solution of pre-conviction forfeiture. In Hobart three experts led a panel discussion regarding protected species, and whether the law is effective in achieving the desire outcome. The panel included Professor Jan MacDonald (Professor of Law at UTAS), Peter McGlone (Tasmanian Conservation Trust) and Jess Feehely (Principal Lawyer at the Environment Defender’s Office). In Melbourne Allie Jalbert spoke about her role as the inspectoral manager at the RSPCA. Allie explained the RSPCA’s role in protecting animals, and the challenges in bringing allegations of animal cruelty under the Victorian Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (Vic) 1986. If you are a law student and are interested in animal law, ALI will be hosting the annual Australia New Zealand Intervarsity Moot on Animal Law (ANIMAL) at Flinders University this year. The event will run over the weekend of September 17 and 18, and will see university teams compete in the only animal law moot for Australian and New Zealand students. For more information and to register, visit www.ali.org.au.

A fierce advocate for By Giulia Prosperi-Porta ANNE Greenaway is one of Australia’s very few lawyers dedicated to fighting for animals. Concern about the high kill rates and poor treatment of healthy dogs and cats in pounds and shelters led Ms Greenaway to establish Lawyers for Companion Animals in 2011. About 250,000 healthy cats and dogs are killed in Australian pounds and shelters every year. “This is a national disgrace,” Ms Greenaway said. The Sydney-based lawyer began her animal law work pro-bono for about 18 months. “I wanted to understand why so many healthy cats and dogs were killed and to try to stop the killing, and why so many neglected animals and those subjected to cruelty were slipping through the cracks,” Ms Greenaway said. “While rescue groups work frantically for these animals there are only a small number of lawyers working on companion animal welfare issues. “There is no shortage of work to be done or companion animals in need of voices to speak on their behalf.” One of Ms Greenaway’s most recent cases dealt with the issue of pets as property. Her client Gina, from country NSW, owned two small dogs

PASSIONATE: Lawyers for Companion Animals Principal Anne Greenaway.

aged three years old and six years old. Gina’s neighbour Jeff bought a dog off Gumtree. Jeff’s dog mauled one of Gina’s dogs, which was euthanized due to its injuries. Two days later, Jeff’s dog jumped over the fence and attacked Gina’s second dog. The second dog did not die, but suffered extensive physical and neurological damage. Gina’s vet bills amounted to over $15,000 The Jurist

as the dog required specialist care. Jeff paid $900 for the cost of the euthanasia and cremation of the first dog. He argued he did not have the money to pay for the second pet’s vet bills. “They (the neighbours) were dealing with a lawyer who was advising them that animals are property and that the dog is a chattel, so the only thing my client was entitled to was the replace

companion animals

OVERLOAD: The majority of cases Ms Greenaway deals with relate to dogs.

ment value the dog,” Ms Greenaway said. “The neighbour’s lawyer said my clients should have taken action to mitigate their loss including putting the dog down, or they should have gone back to Jeff and sought approval before paying the vet bills, or they should have shopped around (getting quotes) from different vets.

“It’s an offensive and insensitive thing to say.” The case ended up settling. “I argued the neighbour had a duty to get the dog back to its condition before the attack,” Ms Greenaway said. “It was foreseeable the second dog would get attacked, given the neighbour’s dog had attacked and killed the first dog two days earlier. The Jurist

“The case would have been the perfect case to test the proposition that animals are property,” Ms Greenaway said. “Animals are regarded as property but shouldn’t be treated the same way as a table or chair or computer – they are not a mass-produced item. “Part of me wishes the case did not settle so we could bring it to court. But litigation is always a risk. It’s all well and good to test the boundaries but you always do what is best for the client,” Ms Greenaway said. Ms Greenaway previously worked as a lawyer for the New South Wales Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP). She said this gave her a good grounding for animal law. “As an ODPP lawyer I had to deal with difficult situations and deal with victims of crime on a regular basis. It’s quite similar being an animal advocate, practicing in the area of Animal Law,” she said. “I feel a great responsibility, especially considering the animal victims have no ability to represent themselves. “It is not easy, it is well and truly not for the faint hearted because you see much cruelty. It is hard work and can be emotionally draining but it is very satisfying.”

Flinders team crowned mooting champions ANIMAL 2015 was held at Melbourne University over the weekend of 19-20 September 2015. The competition was structured into six knockout rounds. Day one included three preliminary rounds, day two included a quarter-final, semi-final and grand final round. The winning team was therefore required to moot six times in two days. The Flinders team was made up of Riana Cermak, Nytiaini Rajanhindren and Phillipa Ewens. Eighteen teams from 14 universities (including seven Group of Eight University teams) around Australia and New Zealand competed. Flinders ANIMAL 2015 team members Philippa Ewens and Nytia Rajanhindren provide an insight into their experience.

same time as I was competing in the Grand Final of the FLSA Open Moot. We invited along our soon to be coach (and topic coordinator of the ‘Animal Law’ elective at Flinders University) Mr Aaron Timoshanko to watch the grand final. This proved to be the ideal setting to deliver him our team sales pitch (that we were a team with the potential to achieve success in the competition) that saw us successfully secure faculty funding and

apathetical approach. In our experience as law students, we all shared limited exposure to the discipline of ‘animal law’, apart from an introduction to the concept of ‘wild law’ during History of Legal Ideas.

In terms of the moot problem, how complex was it?

We knew that the ANIMAL 2014 question had required focused on areas of constitutional and administrative law through the scope of a live exports problem, therefore, had we expected to explore Being able to similar areas of substantive law. Instead, the question for ANIthink on your feet MAL 2015 featured two points and adequately of argument, the first about admissibility of evidence, and respond to such a the second about misleading broad number of and deceptive conduct (a keystone of consumer protecissues was a tion law). These two substantive challenge areas were the scope through which highly topical issues of What motivated you to comfactory farming and labeling coaching support. pete in ANIMAL 2015? of animal products (free range The three of us entered the We were alerted to the eggs and halal certification) competition for various reaexistence of ANIMAL through were explored, as well as more sons. An interest in mooting advertisements on social meniche issues including debate dia in April 2015. After establish- was high on each of our lists, about the methods available but for some, the opportunity ing our collective interest, we to animal rights groups to exto explore issues around animal began campaigning the Law pose animal cruelty, and legalinterests was the real motivator. ity of drone surveillance. School for financial support to assist with registration costs and While one member of the team The moot problem was reis a committed vegetarian, it travel expenses. Coincidentalleased on 14 August 2015, would be fair to say our other ly, this was happening at the giving us just over one two members had a relatively

Philippa Ewens

‘‘

The Jurist

able to think on your feet and adequately respond to such a broad number of issues was a challenge, but we benefited from functioning efficiently as a team, with the non-oralist team member in a given round acting as instructing solicitor, researching and prompting the speaking counsel with information and assistance throughout each moot.

What was the most challenging aspect of the competition?

THRILLED: Nytiaini Rajanhindren, Philippa Ewens and Riana Cermak.

month of preparation prior to the competition. While this may sound like a long time, being prepared to a level that we were satisfied with proved to be a challenge given the factual complexity of the problem and external commitments of team members. Our research focused primarily on existing case law, coupled with exploration of the relevant policy centric arguments. This included researching the practices of the agricultural industry and animal rights activist groups, public opinion on factory farming, and the functions of public agencies including RSPCA and ACCC, drone technology and the use of concealed surveillance as legal evidence.

The Flinders team was highly commended for their ability to answer questions from the bench. What advice would you

give to other mooters when it comes to answering questions from the bench?

The professional backgrounds of the competition Judges was highly varied, some coming from an animal welfare background including advocates and academics, some who are lawyers at the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, and others who are members of the Victorian Bar. This resulted in vastly different questions being asked throughout each round, reflecting the areas within the problem that the Judges found to be most central to the dispute, and highlighting the content they were the most and least familiar with. We trained extensively to predict what questions might be asked (where the weaknesses in our cases lay) and how best to responded to these. Being The Jurist

The periods between each moot were perhaps the most chaotic, yet valuable, times during the competition. Upon completion of a moot, the team would undertake a review process, adapting the most effective arguments from our previous opposition into our own oral submissions and working to develop responses to any unexpected questions from the Judges. The written submissions of the next opposing team would be provided to us an hour before our next moot; we would work to ensure familiarity with any new case law they had included, and prepare arguments to proactively rebut their submissions, and defend likely attacks on our own.

What did you enjoy the most about the competition?

The whole competition weekend was a fantastic experience, every evening featured organised social events at different venues around Melbourne giving us a chance to get to know our fellow competitors and

Flinders team crowned mooting champions have a few drinks with some esteemed members of the legal profession. During the day in the breaks between competition rounds guest speakers presented a variety of talks and interactive panel sessions on different issues relating to animal law, this was really valuable for those students with a great interest in the area.

How did it feel to be crowned the ANIMAL 2015 champions?

After well-matched quarter and semi final moots against the University of Queensland and Australian National University, we were elated to learn that our scores had secured us a place in the Grand Final against the University of Otago from New Zealand. Like the earlier rounds, parties were drawn at random and we were assigned to appear for the Applicant, the ACCC. The Grand Final was judged by the Honourable Justice Hollingworth of the Supreme Court of Victoria, her Honour Judge Millane of the County Court of Victoria, and Joshua Wilson QC of the Victorian Bar. In addition to an intimidating bench, a large audience attended the grand final, and the moot was being professionally filmed and photographed. These factors certainly resulted in a height-

ened degree of nerves which lessened our ability to assess our performance in what felt like a very close round; consequently when we were announced winners of the grand final, we were both shocked and thrilled.

â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;

It is only in law school where you can make comfortable mistakes, so if not now, then when?

Nytiaini Rajanhindren What motivated you to compete in ANIMAL 2015?

I have always liked challenging myself and moots, although gruelling, created the perfect environment to step out of my comfort zone to use what I have learnt in law school. I wear my Flinders Law student badge with pride, and I was thrilled by the fact that this opThe Jurist

portunity could be my way of giving back to the university.

In terms of the Moot problem, was it difficult to research and formulate arguments?

It was quite surprising! I was under the impression that animal law had its own faction and when I read the moot problem, I found out that it was based on Evidence and Consumer Law. It was difficult at first but after reading the problem several times and discussing it with my teammates, we got a better grasp of the questioning research and forming arguments became easier. It was a long process of refining arguments so that we were happy with it though, but it was all worth it.

As a team, did you formulate a strategy for the competition?

Yes, we did. I went for another national moot competition and with that experience, I suggested that we each focused on one particular set so that our research would be thorough. So Philippa took the evidence portion, because she had already completed the topic, and Riana and I took the consumer law portions with her being the Applicant and me the Respondent.

CHALLENGING: Philippa Ewens, Nytiaini Rajanhindren and Riana Cermak prepare their submissions.

What advice would you give to other mooters when it comes to answering questions from the bench? Yes. I remember calling Riana after work just to pit our arguments against each other. She is a real advocate for not consuming animal products and I like to play devil’s advocate and that conversation is my favourite throughout my preparation for the moot. My advice would be to remain calm, listen to the question carefully and take a moment to think through the question.

What was the most challenging aspect of the competition? The intensity of having one

round after the other with only a small break, and being sleep deprived.

that knowing the strengths of your team really goes a long way in reaching a goal.

What did you enjoy the most about the competition?

How did it feel to be crowned the ANIMAL 2015 champions?

1. Working with my team because we all had the same objective- to work hard so that we can make a name for Flinders. 2. Questions from the bench- because it was then that I could break out of “my script” and have an intellectual conversation with the judges.

What is the most important thing you learned from competing?

I learnt that one can never do too much research and The Jurist

Unbelievably great. It was the best birthday present. All that I could think about was, “yes! now people will know what Flinders Law School can do!”

To all law students, just take opportunities like these to challenge yourself. You will never know where it takes you, as long as you are willing to put in the hard work. It is only in law school where you can make comfortable mistakes, so if not now, then when?

Moot your way to the top By Robbie Peschel Previous Jessup Mooter, coach and IHL national student judge FOR a lot of students, many are afraid of participating in moots because they: •Don’t understand what a moot is or; •Are afraid of public speaking or; •Are unsure that they will match up with the opposing side and feel embarrassed or; •Are fearful of the workload. Like any practical legal task, such as client interviewing, letter drafting or negotiation, mooting is a skill acquired by practice. Granted, some people are naturally better than others, but you’ll never know until you try. This article will explain the nuances of a moot, moots that are available to students and some tips and pointers for preparing and undertaking a moot.

What is a moot? A moot is a mock courtroom setting in which a case - usually on appeal, will be verbally argued by a plaintiff/appellant or defendant/ respondent. A case will have a set of facts that will require either to apply points of law or legal principles for the side they

MOOTERS: Robbie Peschel, far right, with fellow mooters outside the High Court of Australia.

are advocating for. For example, a criminal case that may have led to a conviction based on an out-dated legal principle could give rise to an appeal. Other times a case can hinge on a legal grey area and it comes down to who has a more persuasive argument. This is where creative legal arguments can arise. The best thing about moots is applying your learned knowledge to a set of interesting facts. If you are able to do that succinctly in a moot, you can be sure you understand the principles of a certain area of law well. This often follows through in future university work. The Jurist

How is a moot run? Moots are run this way: First there are ‘appearances’. This is where the sides (usually made up of two people, one may serve as ‘of counsel’) will introduce themselves to the judge (or judges). Strict courtroom manners apply in terms of dress code and addressing the court. Plaintiffs/ Prosecution always goes first. Generally, you will address yourself as “May it please the court, my name is Miss/ Mister (last name), as senior counsel (SC), we are representing (your client – plaintiff/ defendant etc) I will address the issue of (item one etc). Thank you, your Honour.” The junior counsel some-

Moot your way to the top times will do the same except address themselves as junior counsel and the final points of contention unless the SC does so in introduction (depending on rules). Once that is done, the Plaintiffs/Appellant present their case followed by the opposing team. The time is limited either per person or cumulatively per team. This means you should be able to make time for questions from the bench (judge) and be able to complete your argument before your time is up. You may be surprised, but they time people in the High Court as well, so it’s a skill you need if you ever dream of presenting a case as a barrister in a courtroom. Sometimes a case can be favoured towards one side. That often is the case. But most of those cases will often be 4:3 or 3:4 in a HCA judgement, which raises points of appeal. So you aren’t going “oh he pointed the gun at this person” you are saying “he drew his gun, because he was uncertain of what may transpire, and therefore took precautions to preserve his life”. That can be a huge difference.

Tips from a pro There are several tips I can give: • If an argument or fact is

inarguable, rather than debating it. Concede it. It saves time and pointless bantering. • PINPOINTS – I cannot understate this enough. It is a small thing, but goes a long way. • Don’t argue with the judge. Say “Your Honour, with due respect”, and then drive a point/appeal home. • Never ask if you can move on with your submission - it’s YOUR submission. I know it’s hard with the judge having a solid face and going … “mmm”? • Try to reduce the “umm” and “ahhh”. Take a deep breath. Consider. Think. It’s better than rambling on and then reaching a point that loses value because the judge got bored. • Always flag your submission. For example, if I am junior counsel I will say: “Your Honour, I address the final two points of contention, this x and x”, and then proceed. It prevents the judge going “well, what about ….”, because he/she knows it is coming. Consider it a ‘roadmap’. • Never, ever pretend to know or fake it. I have judged before, and I can tell a mile off if you don’t know. It’s okay not to know, it’s better to admit it, rather than fake it. • Don’t try to point out basic faults (i.e. number of a UN Article) of the opposing team – it looks petty. The judge The Jurist

can see it, and probably doesn’t need your guidance. • Try to consistently maintain eye contact with the judge, which leads to my next point. • I notice a lot of new mooters will read word for word from a piece of paper. You will not survive long – a judge will ask you a question, and you will be thrown off course. A good mooter will use minimum two pages. I use one page (double-sided) with colored print which shows my roadmap, case citations and dot points. • If you have too many papers, books and other things on your desk or lectern you will look disorganised, get easily flustered and eventually just waste time. • If a judge asks a question, never say you’ll get to it later, address it briefly and inform the judge that you will go into further detail when you reach that point. • A good written submission is helpful. It should be professionally presented, clear and not list 10 cases to illustrate one point. A good key CLR report that reinforces the principle you are advocating is enough. A list of cases that have been never heard of is annoying.

Different competitions There are several moots that are available to par

Moot your way to the top ticipate in. It is prudent you check the rules. Some competitions will judge you together as individuals or some may judge you as a pair.

Flinders First Year Moot This moot is run by FLSA, generally within the first weeks of the second semester. It is a great way to get acquainted with mooting, dealing with cases that you will likely have covered by now. I strongly advise taking up this opportunity. It is a great way to make new friends. It is judged individually. Feedback is given, and this is invaluable.

Flinders Open Moot This moot is also run by FLSA. It covers a range of topics from torts to administrative law. Any years can attempt this moot and as a result, you may compete against more polished mooters. Don’t let this deter you – use this as an opportunity to learn from these people. We’re all students and we all started somewhere. There is the opportunity for the grand finalists to present their case at the Federal Court of South Australia, and then on to the Australian Law Students Association national

competition.

Constitutional Law Moot (Sir Harry Gibbs Prize) A highly regarded moot based on constitutional law. It is widely considered to be a prestigious moot. FLSA runs a constitutional law moot to decide who attends the Sir Harry Gibbs moot at Melbourne Law School. The grand final is held at the High Court in Canberra, presided by the Honourable William Gummow and The Honourable Susan Crennan.

ANIMAL Moot This will be held for the first time in Adelaide, due to the success of Flinders students Riana Cermak, Phillipa Ewens and Nytiaini Rajanhindren in 2015. It focuses on animal law and ethics, a relatively new and exciting area. It will be held at Flinders University on September 17 and 18.

Philip C. Jessup Cup Arguably the world’s most difficult and prestigious moot court competition. It is run by the Flinders Law faculty. It is based on a problem that is international in nature, therefore being presented at the International Court of Justice. We are fortunate enough to have Dr Grant The Jurist

Niemann who was previously a SC for International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. The first few months are spent analysing the problems (usually revolving around a set of contemporary issues facing the world today i.e. Syria) and then writing two memorials for each side. This is then followed by intensive moot practice for one month, where Dr Niemann, academics from the law school and coaches will assist and improve your mooting skills. This is evident with Phillipa Ewens’ skills in mooting since Flinders last competed in 2014/2015. It is held every year in February in Canberra, and a great way to network and meet new people. It is arguably the pinnacle of moots in Australia, with the opportunity to go to the international finals, held in Washington, United States. The Jessup is held as a topic under ‘International Law and Appellate Mooting’ as an elective and run over the summer break. It really is quite an experience. There are many more moots that are available, such as the Kirby Contract moot and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal moot. I strongly encourage first and second year students to get into it as soon as possible.

Enjoy a well-earned break By Audrey Lian CONGRATULATIONS for nearly finishing another semester of law school. It is almost time to return those textbooks, put away the Red Bull, and see your friends and family. Below are some surprising and unconventional things to do in Adelaide. Happy Holidays SWEET: Go on a ‘dessert bar crawl’ in the mid-semester break for something different.

Adventure Room SO. MUCH. FUN. Suitable for groups of two to 14 people, the gist of the live experience is that you are locked in a room for one hour and most work with your group to escape. Hidden in the room are mysterious objects, clues and puzzles. Solving these room elements will lead you to keys, codes, and your eventual escape. It is something a little different, and will definitely be an experience to remember. Adventure Room have built a great experience atmosphere with handcuffs, lab coats, and jail cells adding to the fun. Cost: $28-$36 per person. More info: www. adventurerooms.com.au.

Cheesecake crawl Hit the hottest dessert bars in Adelaide and make a day or night of it. Gather a group of friends and sample the best deserts Adelaide has to offer. As you walk to your

next destination, work up your appetite for the next sweet fix. Christina Soong has written a fabulous review on some of Adelaide’s trendiest desert bars. Build your dessert crawl around one of her recommended locations. Cost: Your waistline (but so worth it). Visit: www. adelaidereview.com.au/foodand-drink/food/a-late-nightguide-to-adelaide-dessert-bars.

Explore Hahndorf Situated 20 minutes away from the Adelaide CBD, Hahndorf makes for a lovely escape from the bustle of the city. Hahndorf is Australia’s oldest surviving German establishment and has the charm to boot. Stroll through the main street of the village and get lost in the quirky shops and chic eateries. With plenty of traditional ‘Fachwerk’ architecture, gorgeous 100-year-old elm trees, and eclectic sights, it makes for the The Jurist

perfect backdrop for your next insta shot. Cost: Your dignity as you get caught mid insta photoshoot. More info: www.hahndorfsa.org. au.

Ikea Something about the mazelike lyout and exotic furniture names elicits feelings of excitement and happiness in me. What is not to love about Swedish meatballs and cranberry sauce? Grab a friend and wonder around the Ikea displays together. Gasp in wonderment at the soft-close cupboards and fill your cart with bits and bobs that will transform your room. Pro Tip: Join the Ikea Family mailing list prior to visiting Ikea to find out the food deals and promotions happening for the month! Yes to more meatballs. Cost: Your good mood as you spend hours assembling the flat pack.

The Jurist

Flinders Law Ball 2016

LEFT: Dani Sapio and Matthew Troy. CENTRE: Emily Wardle and Grace Mitsioulis. RIGHT: Jessica Lena and Luke Richardson.

LEFT: Marni Hood and Alana Humphris. CENTRE: Tayne Redman. RIGHT: Georgina Digance and Troy Eccleston.

The Jurist

SUITED UP: Jordan Flavel, Jim Coffey, Harry Crawford, Olly Vialls, Tom Gerrits at Flinders Law Ball.

Pictures: Brayden Mann

Flinders Law Ball 2016 By Kelly Stephenson WHAT a night it was, as Flinders students dressed up in red carpet attire for the must-notmiss event of the year. This yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Annual Law Ball was hosted at the Art Gallery of South Australia. The venue was beautiful in itself, with intricate artwork shaping the interior and striking sculptures flanking the exterior patio area. With just the use of a singular red carpet the whole venue was transformed into pure elegance, perfectly matching the chic red carpet theme. Upon entry attendees were instantly captured on the red carpet by photographer Brayden Mann, giving an in-

stantaneous feel of luxury, and fantastic photos for later. The DJ, from JP Light and Sound, delivered a wellversed range of music, much to the crowds pleasure, evident by the amount of people hitting the dance floor. Food rotated the room on a continuous basis, with crowd favourites being the delicious chicken tenders, and ham and cheese toasties. The free drinks were popular, as usual, and everybody was giddy in no time. As luck would have it, people were blessed with mild weather allowing them to enjoy the outdoor patio area without worrying about hypothermia. The ball itself was a huge success, with everyone reThe Jurist

ceiving their worth out of it and many fantastic photos and memories alike. After the ball, everyone who was still ready to party made their way down the road to Distill where the also- popular after party took place. Here they were able to party the rest of the night away, or they could slink home to bed (much like I did), to reminisce on a wonderful night. A big thank you to the Flinders Law Studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Association Activities Director Tom McCourt for planning the event, and his Activities Team for helping coordinate the event. Until next year.

How to buy a politician By Sara Saad WITH a federal election looming on the horizon, Australians are poised to vote for the lesser of two evils. In light of this, the main question on every voting Australian’s mind is, how can I buy a politician? Okay… maybe it’s only on my mind, but how better to protect your interests than investing in your political convictions, I mean it’s part of being a democracy.

Political bribes In Australia, the term ‘bribe’ is somewhat frowned upon, so it is substituted with the phrases ‘political donation’ or ‘lobbying’ instead. Political donations allow members of the Australian public to donate unlimited amounts of money towards their party or politician of choice. This right is not only extended to natural persons but, unlike in other jurisdictions, Australia extends this right to corporations - they are juristic persons after all, why can’t they have a political agenda? In fact, the political convictions of corporations are so strong that nine out of the top 10 companies listed on the ASX simultaneously donated to both major parties. Talk about sharing the love.

Fundraising ventures Fundraising ventures take various forms, including raffles, barbecues and, in some circumstances, complex tiered membership schemes entailing direct interaction with cabinet ministers, intimate dinners with decision makers, and lavish functions. Fundraising plays an integral part in any political campaign; so party members capable of bringing in funding are often rewarded for their efforts with a greater degree of power within the party structure. Theoretically, substantially backing a politician increases their power, which may or may not be used to protect the The Jurist

interests of the backer.

Donation restrictions Be weary though, some restrictions are placed on phantom donations. If you only want to donate $0 - $12,799, you can do so anonymously. If you want to donate more, it’s a little complicated but don’t worry, they’ve made it possible. The anonymous donation limit of $12,800 only applies to donations per federal branch of the party – so technically, up to nine anonymous donations of $12,799 or less can be made to each of their branches. Further, you can donate as a company, then

How to buy a politician again as an individual. Still want to anonymously donate more? No problem, associated entities to the rescue! Parties have created associated entities, for donor convenience, which allow funds to be channelled through to parties. Associated entities are less scrutinised and details of donations are harder to follow, as they are not legally obligated to declare their sources, which hinders attempts to trace donations. Banned from donating? That’s okay too! Associated entities have you covered and are experienced in passing on banned donations as well. In fact, these entities are so popular amongst donors that 2016 saw $173 million dollars channelled through them, 37 per cent of which originated from anonymous sources.

them to less onerous disclosure laws. So, if the associated entities don’t have your back, rest assured, the parties do. Political parties aren’t the only ones good at keeping secrets. Last year, individuals and companies failed to declare an excess of $1.3 million dollars worth of donations.

Government, including caps on individual donations.

Rest assured, these regulations can be bypassed thanks to inconsistencies between State and Federal Laws. A prime example is New South Wales, where property developers and the alcohol and gaming industry are banned from donating. However, those subject to these laws Ineffective mechanisms have been directed to doYou may ask, what poten- nate to the federal arm of the tial liability those wishing not party who then pass the doto declare their donations nations on to the State arm. face. Well, the Australian Neat, huh? Electoral Commission (AEC) So in short, it doesn’t matis armed with investigative ter whether you’re a banned powers to ensure coherence donor or want to donate the with the act. However, this is entirety of your assets anona notoriously long process. ymously, when there is a will, Additionally, the AEC has there is a way. not indicated the number of charges that have been laid for breaches of disclosure Sara for Prime Minister laws, although it has ben sugShould you wish to undergested that there have been Poorly kept secrets mine the democratic process, It must be said that the La- no successful prosecutions as donations can be made to bor Party has made a com- of yet. So, although mechmy personal campaign ‘sarmitment to declare the re- anisms are in place, their ah4primeminister’ by deposceipt of donations above effectiveness is somewhat iting funds into the following $1000, yet in 2015 the party questionable. account 06345-826374972. failed to declare $202,809 Please, keep them on worth of donations. SimilarGetting over state restrictions the down low by donating ly, the Liberal Party failed to Be careful when buying amounts less than $12,800 or disclose $50,960. Additionally, on several instances, politicians at the State Gov- if you’re feeling particularly both parties were found to ernment level. Each state, generous, channel funding have misclassified gifts and except Victoria, has its own through my associated entidonations as ‘other receipts’ regulations for donations to ties, ‘Bye Bye Mal Pty Ltd’ or or ‘subscriptions,’ subjecting members and parties in State ‘Farewell Bill Pty Ltd.’ The Jurist

Welcome to The Jurist’s Jury Duty. Where we ask law students the important questions in life.

1. One place in the world you’d love to travel to 2. Fave place to get readings done

1. South Korea 2. Law Library. It’s nice and quiet

3. Your guilty pleasure

3. Clash of Clans on my iPhone

4. Your go-to coffee order

4. Long black

5. Pick a period of history to visit 6. Fave emoji

5. 17th Century Japan 6.

1. Borneo to visit the battlefields 2. Seminar Room, Law Library 3. Playing music 4. Skim Black White 5. Late 1930s/ Early 1940s

1. England and Scotland to visit family 2. In bed, at home 3. Glass of Baileys on ice 4. Hot chocolate 5. 20s/30s, the Gatsby era! 6.

WHEN IS THE BEST TIME TO DO A LAW EXAM? Here are the FLSA Committee’s thoughts#8:45am won 16.67% of votes #1:15pm won 16.67% of votes

#5:45pm won 66.67% of votes The Jurist

Life advice and captions by Audrey Lian Illustrations by the wildly talented Elisha Freedman Need to land a clerkship? No fear. The Jurist has you covered better than your Mac Pro Longwear foundation.

Apply an even layer of foundation to your face. Like your face, your resume needs to be evenly spread so you appear like a well-rounded individual.

Apply concealer to any imperfections. Is that a pimple? No. It’s an obstacle that you overcame, forming you into the flawless candidate you are today.

Curl your lashes. They symbolise your rise up the ruthless corporate ladder.

Overdraw your lips by 10% with a flesh coloured lip liner. This is representative of the fact that you give 110% in everything you do.

The Jurist

Using neutral shades, apply eye shadow to your lids. Like your eye shadow, you must be neutral and appeal to the broadest range of personality types. This is not a time for aqua blue or statements like “I don’t like dogs”.

Like you, your eyebrows are team players. Fill them in.

How to effectively EVERYONE gets stressed to some extent about exams, including all those other people who look so relaxed. But do you get really stressed, that by the time the exams come you feel awful and don’t perform the way you want to? There are some things you can do to manage those nerves, feel better and get better results. Understand what’s happening Because exams are stressful, we automatically react to them with the stress response the ‘fight or flight’ response. This is fine, up to a point. It pushes us to get going, but beyond that point, if we’re too stressed it works against us. That’s because the stress response is an old biological survival mechanism that is getting us ready to

do something fast and physical, which it does very well, starting with a rush of adrenaline that gets the body all charged up. But too much tension or worry is not very good for thinking or memory. When we are too tense or worried, we may forget or make mistakes. That’s what’s happening when you go into an exam, look at the paper and can’t remember things you know perfectly well. Or make really dumb mistakes that you realise as soon as you hand your paper in and walk out. But this is temporary. The knowledge is still there. All you need to do is calm down. Do enough preparation. But not too much. You can be totally calm and The Jurist

still not get there if you haven’t done some preparation. But remember, it doesn’t have to be perfect. Knowing you’ve done a reasonable job of preparing is a relief in itself. But it’s important to keep yourself in good shape and not get super-stressed before the exams. Remember to: •Eat well: Don’t switch entirely to comfort foods. Remember the body and mind need real fuel. •Sleep well: Allow yourself enough time. Try to stick to a regular schedule. Watch the caffeine. •Take breaks: We need breaks and relaxation to keep us balanced. It’s not wasting time. •Exercise: It helps maintain

Get physical: Keeping up with exercise during the exam period can help relieve stress, lift your mood and increase concentration and productivity.

deal with exams health, release tension, lift our mood and enhance concentration. •Get help with problems: If something is really affecting you, get help from academics if it’s about the topic, from counsellors if it’s personal matters or from doctors if it’s health problems. Learn and practise methods to calm yourself Get better at noticing when you’re stressing out (breathing getting too fast? Butterflies? Can’t sleep? Heart racing?). Slow everything down. •Breathe slowly •As you breathe out, remind yourself: ‘relax’, or ‘slow down’, or ‘take it easy’ •As you breathe out, let your muscles relax and loosen up

•It may help to walk around slowly as well to give you a ‘whole body’ slow down You can do this anywhere, for a few seconds or a few minutes. Close your eyes if you feel like it. You can do it: •When you are about to study; it helps concentration •When you are about to sit an exam; it helps concentration and memory •When you are in an exam, can’t think of something and begin to panic. Think realistically and positively about yourself and your goals Often we get stuck thinking negatively, actually scaring ourselves. When we scare ourselves, we switch on the stress response and there we go again. The Jurist

So make sure you’re thinking realistically and positively: •‘I can understand most things, and I don’t need 100 per cent, so I don’t need to panic.’ •‘I can’t remember this one right now, so I’ll answer another one, then it’ll probably come back to me. •‘I’m prepared for this one and I know how to calm myself down if I do get rattled.’ •‘I can pass.’ These basic steps - calm down, slow down, think positively - will work for most of us most of the time. But if you are feeling stuck, there is more you can do about it. Talk it over with a counsellor to see what would work better for you. - Flinders Health, Counselling and Disability Services

Sarah Gates’ first novel SARAH Gates is a law and creative writing student at Flinders University. On July 1 her debut novel Love Elimination will be released in print and eBook in Australia and New Zealand. Love Elimination explores what really goes on behind the scenes on reality TV as its two main characters fall in love on and off set. Sarah sat down with The Jurist to talk about her upcoming book, what motivates her as a writer, and how she balances her studies with her passion for creative writing.

Firstly, can you please tell us about your writing background? I’ve always loved reading and writing. My cupboards are full of notebooks filled with short stories, half-hearted diary entries and blurbs for books I wanted to write. At sixteen, I wrote my first novel — a young adult story about a girl with cancer — and posted it on a website called Wattpad, receiving over 9.6 million views. I forgot about writing in Year 12 and after a difficult and emotional first year of uni, I realised that I needed that creative outlet. So in the holidays after first year, I applied for every writing position I could find.

In my second year I started a writing group, was editor of Empire Times, reviewed for Buzzcuts and volunteered as a workshop assistant at SA Writers Centre. I went on to climb the ladder from volunteer to admin staff to marketing assistant at SA Writers Centre; edit three other publications (including The Jurist); get a job in media at Flinders University Student Association; win Carclew’s Colin Thiele Scholarship for Creative Writing; receive a writing residency in Perth; attend many conferences and festivals; and win a few more grants. Over the past four years, I’ve found ‘my tribe’ in the writing community.

own dessert café; a dream that has taken years of hard work and strict saving. She knows reality TV is a big, manipulated lie—and gorgeous leading man Luke Westwood can’t possibly be for real. Can he?

Last year I received my first publishing contract and my novel, Love Elimination, is coming out in July 2016!

What inspired you to write Love Elimination?

Tell us about Love Elimination. Love Elimination takes a playful look behind-thescenes of reality TV as Anna and Luke fall in love on and off set. Love Elimination might be a hit new reality dating show, but Anna Hobbs isn’t in it for love. Coerced onto the show by her sister, a producer, Anna is a reluctant fill in. Anna dreams of owning her The Jurist

I adore reality television dating shows. When I was brainstorming ideas for my novel, I was watching The Bachelor, If You Are The One, Ready for Love, Love At First Sight... as well as reading just about every behind-thescenes interview I could get my digital hands on. My novel was always going to be a romance and once I had the setting of the television show, the story developed from there. It took about three incarnations of the first

hits the shelves in July To my utter shock, I won that year.

three chapters until I figured out who the main characters were and what their stories were, but once I got there it was full steam ahead.

How does it feel to finally have your first novel hit the shelves? It’s exciting, nerve-wracking and the proudest moment of my life thus far. I don’t know what emotion to focus on!

Was there a special process you went through when writing Love Elimination? I applied for Carlew’s 2015 Colin Thiele Scholarship for Creative Writing, which awarded $12,500 towards the professional development and a creative project of a young writer. Carclew gives feedback to every applicant, so I thought I’d apply and practise my grant application writing for when I was ready to be a serious contender.

My ambitious application included: a mentorship with best selling romance author, Victoria Purman; a manuscript assessment; a living wage to write my romance novel; and travel and registration for the Romance Writers of Australia conference in August, where I would pitch my manuscript. This meant I had to write a book in eight months. Crazy. I hadn’t factored in editing or exams. I ended up writing the novel in five months (with three of those just rewriting the first 10,000 words until I knew what I wanted), taking a month off for exams, and then editing over two months. I had a lot of help from my mentor, who kept me accountable, on deadline, and provided feedback every step of the way so I didn’t get off track. Then I pitched my book at two conferences (the Adelaide Pitch Conference popped up unexpectedly in July, so I grabbed that opportunity as well) to seven publishers, all of whom requested to see my book. Two weeks after I sent it off, I received a publishing offer from Harlequin MIRA—the world’s largest publisher of romance novels! It was a rollercoaster year. The Jurist

How did you come up with ideas for the characters? Are they based on real people? The story idea usually comes first, and the characters are whatever they need to be within that structure. For Love Elimination my main character, Anna, had to be a reluctant contestant on the reality television dating show and the hero, Luke, had to be her perfect match—so everything stemmed from that. None of the characters are based on people in my life. I imagine that incites all types of real-life drama!

Do you have any plans for more novels in the near future? Absolutely! I have two ideas that I’m tossing up between at the moment. I won’t say anything more about them, since it’s such early stages. But hopefully I make a decision and get a whole chunk done in the midyear break, before my publisher starts asking for book two (assuming Love Elimination does well!).

**Readers are invited to the book launch of Love Elimination on Thursday June 30, at Dymocks Rundle Mall, 6pm. Visit: www.dymocks. com.au/Events/StoreEventsSouth-Australia.

ABOVE: Tim Bost, Olivia Hanna, Edward Shorne-Holden, Dr Skye Saunders, Philippa Ewens, Max Joy and Matilda Brown at FLSA’s Women in Law breakfast held in May.

Believe in yourself “LISTEN to that instinctive whisper that’s deeply ingrained within you and trust it,” was Dr Skye Saunders greatest advice for Flinders Law students. She also encouraged to students to take risks, build confidence and believe in themselves. Dr Saunders from the ANU Legal Workshop was the guest

speaker at FLSA’s 2016 Women in Law Breakfast, held in May. Dr Saunders spoke about her journey in the legal profession, including her work as an Employment Relations and Discrimination Law solicitor in Canberra. The role sparked her interest in sexual harassment, and she became an advocate The Jurist

for issues of gender and the law, particularly in remote Australian communities. She recently published a book Whispers from the Bush - The Workplace Sexual Harassment of Australian Rural Women. Dr Saunders is the Director of the ANU Graduate Diploma of Legal Practice and the ANU Master of Legal Practice.

The Flinders Law Studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Association would like to extend our gratitude to our sponsors, who make it possible for us to continue to provide excellent services to our students.

PLATINUM

GOLD

SILVER

GENERAL Allens Ashurst Baker & McKenzie Finlaysons Fisher Jeffries Johnston Winter & Slattery King & Wood Mallesons Lawskool Thomson Geer The Jurist