Antitrust policy aims to reduce market concentration and increase competition among firms. Contemporary antitrust is sensitive to both domestic and international considerations. Internationally, the market is dominated by the largest firms, raising questions about the competitiveness of domestic firms and the application of antitrust against foreign firms. Domestically, public support for antitrust is needed for continued enforcement. This paper examines how international markets shape public support for antitrust in the United States. Using media analysis, we find that antitrust is increasingly in the news, and that international competition is referenced in antitrust debates. We theorize that support for antitrust is shaped by concerns for the competitiveness of domestic firms, relative to foreign competition, and that these concerns vary based on individuals’ levels of nationalism. We test our theory using a survey experiment and find that individuals are especially concerned with being placed at a disadvantage relative to foreign competitors. Interestingly, we find that using antitrust laws against foreign firms yields divergent reactions—highly nationalistic Americans increase their support for strong antitrust laws, while those with low levels of nationalism decrease support. The paper highlights the importance of global competition in shaping preferences for domestic regulation.

This article shall examine a discrete, though somewhat overlooked, aspect of the relationship between the Commonwealth Parliament and the federal, or ‘Chapter III’, courts which emerges in the scenario where Parliament purports to amend the law that the courts are required to apply in pending cases. This is of particular significance where the Commonwealth is a party to the proceedings, given the obvious advantage to the Commonwealth, as litigant, provided by its power to legislate, and potentially to do so strategically to effect a desirable outcome. This raises the spectre of a significant separation of powers issue. This article will explore the extent to which this principle entrenched as law in the Australian Constitution has been able to limit Parliament's power to protect the independence of the federal courts to interpret and apply the law in an individual adjudication; that is, to protect their ‘decisional independence.’ Its success or otherwise is one measure of the extent to which the separation of powers, as a legal rule, is capable of protecting the independent adjudication of legal disputes by the courts from the vicissitudes of political power and influence.

In an examination of the existing limitations of freedom of assembly and demonstration in the A.C.T., Mr Brown first deals with the common law and various statutory provisions as they stood in 1971. He then examines the Public Order (Protection of Persons and Property) Act 1971 (Cth) in some depth. His conclusion, after a brief discussion of rights of peaceful assembly in the present law, is that the current legal position in the A.C.T. is unsatisfactory in that it does not give sufficient guarantees to civil rights but rather embodies repressive laws to prevent threats of public disorder that may be more imaginary than real.

This article details how Plautus’ Casina has been used in a general education comparative gender history class over multiple semesters. Since Casina was based on an Athenian New Comedy play (The Lot-Castors by Diphilus), it incorporates elements of late fourth/early third century BCE Athenian ideas on gender, gender roles, and sexuality as well as Republican Roman views on these same areas from approximately a century later. For an introductory comparative gender history course which is designed for a wide time span, this play therefore offers the opportunity to look at two related cultures in just one work. The article highlights areas of the play emphasising those cultures’ ideals and values, and also deals with which areas students have most commented on and which ones are often ignored, in terms of characters, gender roles, and sexualities. The role and representation of slaves in those societies and within the play are also remarked upon.

In recent years, scholars worldwide have begun organising and developing a coherent framework and research agenda focused on the emerging field of ‘global administrative law’. This nascent body of law, unlike domestic or national forms of administrative law, does not operate within the bounds of unitary nation states, and unlike traditional accounts of public international law, it does not arise exclusively between nation states. Instead it operates in a transnational or global space occupied by a vast variety of administrative actors responsible for trans-governmental regulation and administration; the field of ‘global governance’. To combat growing concerns that there are crucial legitimacy, accountability and democratic deficiencies inherent in this system of global governance, numerous administrative law type mechanisms and principles have been developed by global administrative bodies. Global administrative law embodies the totality of these various mechanisms and principles.

This article examines the conduct of empirical legal research and its relationship to law reform. Through a detailed analysis of the largest survey of State and federal judges conducted in Australia it explores some of the limits to empirical investigation, particularly the tendency to rely primarily on judicial perspectives as the basis for law reform. Focusing upon empirical legal research on the subject of expert evidence the article initially examines research methodologies, then extends the analysis to consider the correspondence between the collection, interpretation and presentation of empirical data and recommendations for legal change. This involves an assessment of a broad range of methodological and theoretical issues with implications extending well beyond the particular survey. Last, the empirical research on expert evidence will be evaluated using the principal reform proposal suggested by the investigators. This exercise will provide an indication of methodological problems which beset the survey and demonstrate practical limitations with the particular approach to expertise.

We study the last exit time that a spectrally negative Lévy process is below zero until it reaches a positive level b, denoted by $g_{\tau_b^+}$. We generalize the results of the infinite-horizon last exit time explored by Chiu and Yin (2005) by incorporating a random horizon $\tau_b^+$, which represents the first passage time above b. We derive an explicit expression for the joint Laplace transform of $g_{\tau_b^+}$ and $\tau_b^+$ by utilizing a hybrid observation scheme approach proposed by Li, Willmot, and Wong (2018). We further study the optimal prediction of $g_{\tau_b^+}$ in the $L_1$ sense, and find that the optimal stopping time is the first passage time above a level $y_b^{\ast}$, with an explicit characterization of the stopping boundary $y_b^{\ast}$. As examples, Brownian motion with drift and the Cramér–Lundberg model with exponential jumps are considered.

The Australian High Court has in general rejected the use of extrinsic historical material in the interpretation of the Constitution. Though it has consistently claimed that in interpreting a Constitutional provision it is giving effect to the intentions of the founders, it has not been prepared to turn to the convention debates, draft constitutional bills or other primary records in order to ascertain the founders' intentions. The intention is to be ascertained from the ordinary and natural meaning of the words themselves, relying on the proper legal methods of construction and interpretation. However, even when this rule was considered to be settled doctrine there were exceptions. In those cases where the words were ambiguous the Court could turn to the drafts of the Constitution “as a matter of history of legislation”. As well, convention debates could be referred to “for the purpose of seeing what was the subject matter of discussion, what was the evil to be remedied, and so forth”.

One area in which the rights of Australian workers have lagged behind their counterparts in other western democracies is that of protection against unfair dismissal. The common law action for breach of the contract of employment has, of course, been open to employees in common law countries including Australia but recognition of the inadequacy of this procedure has led to the introduction of statutory protection against dismissal in a number of common law jurisdictions including the United Kingdom. While some of the Australian States have sought to legislate in this area the protection available at federal level has, at least until recently, been inadequate.

This paper will explore the background to the federal dismissals jurisdiction in Australia and the recent developments which have extended the protection against unfair dismissal available within the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration system. At federal level, a dual system of redress for unfair dismissal has developed.

The Treblinka revolt has received extensive scholarly attention, though little of this work considers the resistance actions of women prisoners. In this article, I use spatial methods to reveal how Jews at Treblinka created three examples of what I term ‘places of resistance’ and how women supported each. Critically, this article demonstrates how studying these locations highlights the roles of women in resistance up to and including the famous uprising. Taking analyses of gender and memory further, I also examine how our scant knowledge of women's lives at Treblinka prompts consideration of archival silences, masculinity, and oral history practice.

What causes demographic misperceptions of minority populations? We anticipate that the extent to which members of the majority group perceive the minority group as a threat shapes their estimation of minority group size. While existing research argues that demographic misperceptions of minority groups can lead to a sense of threat, we argue that the opposite relationship may exist—that threat also causes demographic misperception. We test our argument using an experiment embedded in a survey of Muslims in Indonesia. We manipulate perceived threat of Christians in Indonesia and then ask respondents to estimate the size of the Christian population. While Muslims generally overestimated the size of the Christian population, we find that Muslims who felt a greater sense of threat estimated the Christian population to be significantly larger at both the national and provincial levels. This finding provides new insights on the directionality of the relationship between the widely acknowledged connection between threat and demographic misperceptions.

To be trite is to be worn out by constant use or repetition, or to be hackneyed or commonplace. The word “trite” is derived from the Latin word terere meaning essentially “to rub”. Thus, the word has physical associations, as if a trite remark actually erases its own origins because they are of no use anymore. Obviously the more used something is, the more trite it becomes, or so one would expect. There is even a built-in pejorative connotation, as to overuse a phrase, or resort to trite propositions can, in some cases, “rub” the listener the wrong way.

Since the very humble beginnings of the common law courts, judges have identified law that is trite. In the 15th century, Chief Justice Brian, in a case known only as T Pasch's case, said, in words that have since rung down the centuries: