November 29, 2013
Today the ACMA commences a campaign on the usage of smart devices, especially phones, by youth and the consequences of oversharing. ACMA has set up a cybersmart website found here.
The media release (found here) relevantly provides:
It’s something all too obvious to parents of teenagers: how much life has changed in the last three years, let alone since they were teens. And with smartphones now in most teens’ pockets, using Snapchat, Instagram, WhatsApp and hashtags, the ins and outs of social media can be Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Privacy
|
Post a comment »
November 28, 2013
Public Books has reviewed a newly released book by Oxford University Press, Family Secrets: Shame and Privacy in Modern Britain. It is an interesting review of the development of the concept of privacy from its original concepts to the modern cause of action.
The review provides:
October 10, 2013 — Family Secrets by Deborah Cohen injects the marrow back into two centuries of skeletons locked away in household closets. A leading historian of modern Britain and Europe, Cohen has put together a rollicking read through the hidden land of cultural morality and its fundamental institution, the family. A son who prefers lipstick to lip balm might bring little shame to the family name today, but Cohen takes it as her project to explain how the secrets of the 19th century have been transformed into questions of privacy in the 20th. The sources of Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in General, Privacy
|
Post a comment »
November 27, 2013
The report UN backing universal privacy right highlights the concern and frustration over the phone tapping scandal arising out of the Snowden revalations. Germany and Brazil were particularly annoyed and sponsored the motion. It will of course have little practical effect.
The UN General Assembly’s human rights committee has unanimously adopted a resolution sponsored by Brazil and Germany to protect the right to privacy against unlawful surveillance, following months of reports about US eavesdropping abroad.
The symbolic resolution, Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Privacy
|
Post a comment »
Today I delivered a paper on Privacy and health records.
The topics I covered were:
Patient privacy and confidential record management Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Health privacy issues, Privacy
|
Post a comment »
November 26, 2013
For those interested in gauging the approach of the Privacy Commissioner to his use of soon to be newly acquired enforcement powers his Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Commonwealth Privacy Commissioner, Privacy
|
Post a comment »
November 25, 2013
The Federal Court Rules 2011 have been amended to support the first stage of the implementation in the Federal Court of an electronic court file.
The amendments will make relatively minor changes to such things as the use of stamps and seals; preparation and lodging of documents; redacting, amending and removing documents; and producing documents for inspection or in compliance with a subpoena.
According to the notification from the Fedeal Court the the Amendment Rules will:
1. amend subrules 2.01(2) and (3) and paragraph 39.35(1)(b) and Schedule 1 to clarify that either the seal of the Court (for convenient processing electronically) or the stamp of a District Registry (for convenient processing in paper) can be used;
2. insert new rules Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Federal Court, Legal, Practice and Procedure
|
Post a comment »
The Itnews report on a speech by the Privacy Commissioner is Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Privacy
|
Post a comment »
This practice note deals with cross-border insolvency co-operation with foreign courts. It is found here.
The amendment is the inserttion of paragraph 6 Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Federal Court, Legal
|
Post a comment »
The Federal Court has issued a new Practice Note APP 2, dealing with the Court’s requirements for Appeal Books and preparation for hearing. It is found here.
The amendments include Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Federal Court, Legal
|
Post a comment »
November 24, 2013
The Court of Appeal in Wolfe v Permanent Custodians [2013] VSCA 331 considered issues of duty to co operate in the context of a contractual relationship and unconscionability by a creditor in recovery proceedings against a defaulting mortgagor.
FACTS
Permanent Custodians Ltd (“Permanent”) holds a first mortgage over a property in Pascoe Vale which secured a loan to Mr Wolfe and his former partner [1]. In 2008 there was default on the loan. In August 2009 Permanent obtained default judgment against Wolfe, a default judgment for the loan and for possession of the Property against his former partner and issued a warrant of possession. Eviction by the Sheriff was scheduled for the week commencing 4 December 2009 [4]. Wolfe entered into an arrangement, on terms set out in a letter from Permanent’s solicitors on 1 December 2009 (the “1 December 2009 arrangement”)[5].
Those terms were, at [6],relevantly:
Posted in General, Insolvency, Victorian Court of Appeal
|
Post a comment »