![]() ![]() This collective work-the first of its kind-will be of value to policy makers, media, law reform agencies, academics, practitioners and the judiciary. ![]() In addition, Indigenous perspectives on law reform are embedded throughout each part. Retreatment of a lower second premolar with 3 canals (2018). It is divided into six main parts: commercial and corporate law, criminal law and evidence, environmental law, private law, public law, and legal practice and legal education. Sekiyos Trap (2018) Rats First Kiss/Life in New York/Possum: (2018) Ratamo (2018). The book is intended to serve as a national focal point for Australian legal innovation. It emerges from a major conference held at The Australian National University in 2016, which featured intensive discussion among participants from government, practice and the academy. This book collects over 50 discrete law reform recommendations, encapsulated in short, digestible essays written by leading Australian scholars. Academics can and should take the lead in this process. I will challenge these normative statements by drawing upon sociolinguistic literature on the history of swear words revealing how legal opinions of what is offensive are infused with discriminatory, moralistic judgments on language use, class and gender.įor reasons of effectiveness, efficiency and equity, Australian law reform should be planned carefully. At the same time, judges ostensibly ignore the historical and cultural aspects of language change, presenting their views of language as fixed, ahistorical and apolitical. These cases contain normative views on Australian swearing, class, gender and the proper use of public space. In exploring these issues, I compare views expressed in Australian cases from the 19th and early 20th centuries, to those in more recent cases including McCormack v Langham (Unreported, Supreme Court of NSW, 5 September 1991, Studdert J), Couchy v Del Vecchio QCA 9 and Heanes v Herangi (2007) 175 A Crim R 175. In particular, I will focus on how judges mimic the ‘received wisdom’ on the appropriate spaces in which Australians should swear. From cases on the ‘Great Australian Adjective’, to the ‘f-word’ and of course the contentious ‘c-word’, I will explore how judges rehash common-sense views on swearing in Australia. N this paper I will discuss perspectives on offensive language in Australian criminal law since the beginning of the 19th century. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |