Does humanity have a moral obligation to emphasise nanotechnology’s role in addressing the critical public health and environmental problems of our age? This well-crafted book explores this idea by analysing the prospects for a macroscience nanotechnology-for-environmental sustainability project in areas such as food, water and energy supply, medicine, healthcare, peace and security. Developing and applying an innovative science-based view of natural law underpinning a global social contract, it considers some of the key scientific and governance challenges such a global project may face.

Peace-building in a number of contemporary contexts involves fragile states, influential customary systems and histories of land conflict arising from mass population displacement. This book is a timely response to the increased international focus on peace-building problems arising from population displacement and post-conflict state fragility. It considers the relationship between property and resilient customary systems in conflict-affected East Timor. The chapters include micro-studies of customary land and population displacement during the periods of Portuguese colonization and Indonesian military occupation. There is also analysis of the development of laws relating to customary land in independent East Timor (Timor Leste). The book fills a gap in socio-legal literature on property, custom and peace-building and is of interest to property scholars, anthropologists, and academics and practitioners in the emerging field of peace and conflict studies.

This fourth edition of Law in Context not only updates the text by reference to the latest thinking and developments in the broad area of ‘law in context’, but also introduces readers to the wider social, political and regulatory contexts of law. Bottomley and Bronitt, as in previous editions, expose readers to the multitude of contexts (some explicit, others implicit) that affect how law is made, broken and enforced by the state or individual citizens. The fundamental ideals of law – such as the Rule of Law – rest on cherished liberal values, though the authors constantly encourage readers not to accept uncritically the rhetoric of law, but to test these assumptions through empirical eyes. 

This new edition of Delegated Legislation in Australia deals in detail with the important topic of delegated or subordinate legislation. Legislation made by various government and other bodies under the authority of an Act of Parliament exceeds in volume the legislation made by Parliaments in the form of Acts. This book is an essential guide for legislators, public officials at all levels of government, judicial officers and lawyers.

Kangaroo Courts and the Rule of Law -The Legacy of Modernism addresses the legacy of contemporary critiques of language for the concept of the rule of law. Between those who care about the rule of law and those who are interested in contemporary legal theory, there has been a dialogue of the deaf, which cannot continue. Starting from the position that contemporary critiques of linguistic meaning and legal certainty are too important to be dismissed, Desmond Manderson takes up the political and intellectual challenge they pose. Can the rule of law be re-configured in light of the critical turn of the past several years in legal theory, rather than being steadfastly opposed to it? Pursuing a reflection upon the relationship between law and the humanities, the book stages an encounter between the influential theoretical work of Jacques Derrida and MIkhail Bakhtin, and D.H. Lawrence's strange and misunderstood novel Kangaroo (1923).

Civil Procedure Commentary & Materials provides students and practitioners with a comprehensive analysis of the practical and theoretical issues encountered in Australian civil procedure, including alternative dispute resolution. Civil Procedure Commentary & Materials combines a wealth of primary and secondary materials from all jurisdictions. The common law is clearly set out, together with extensive practical commentary. Each chapter features in-depth questions and notes together with lists of further reading to aid and extend understanding. Civil Procedure Commentary & Materials examines and discusses each substantive and procedural step in the trial process.

Between 1964 and 1990, Texaco dumped about 16 billion gallons of toxic substances into the surface water of the Amazon, relied upon by indigenous Amazon and remote farmers. Texaco also created hundreds of unlined pits in the jungle floor and filled them with toxic sludge. In 1993, the Amazon indigenous communities and remote farmers sued Texaco in the United States, its home jurisdiction, seeking redress for damages caused by Texaco’s operations. From 1993 to 2002 Texaco and later Chevron, when it acquired Texaco, fought to have the case dismissed and moved to Ecuador as the more appropriate forum to try the case. Ultimately, the U.S. action was dismissed in exchange for promises by Chevron to accept jurisdiction in Ecuador and satisfy any judgment rendered by an Ecuadorian court. The case was re-filed and tried in Ecuador. On February 14, 2011 the Provincial Court of Sucumbios awarded the Ecuadorian plaintiffs $8.6 billion in damages, with $5.6 billion going toward environmental remediation.

Anticipating the worst, Chevron took preemptive action back in the United States. With the judgment not final and no attempt by the Ecuadorian plaintiffs to enforce in the U.S., Chevron filed a complaint against the Ecuadorians seeking declaratory relief for non-recognition of the Ecuadorian judgment and a preliminary injunction enjoining the Ecuadorians from seeking to have the Ecuadorian judgment recognized or enforced anywhere in the world. On March 7, 2011, the U.S. Federal District Court in the Southern District of New York granted the preliminary injunction in this Opinion. The Ecuadorian's have appealed and this amicus brief was filed on June 9, 2001 in support of the Ecuadorians. The brief seeks to show that the District Court erred in granting the injunction and that international legal obligations of the United States requires that the injunction be dissolved and the case dismissed.

Despite a finding by the Australian Federal Police that it has been unable to identify any breaches of Australian law by Julian Assange, the apparent leader of Wikileaks, we submit that such a finding is far from certain. While we are not in a position to second-guess the AFP on the strength of the evidence available, we highlight that there are matters of public record and a legal background that suggests that Assange and Wikileaks may have come close to committing an offence/s under the Australian Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) relating to telecommunication services.

This "case study" was intended to be included in Anton & Shelton, Environmental Problems and Human Rights (Cambridge, 2011), but space limitations forced its omission from the printed text. Among large infrastructure projects, damming rivers to provide hydroelectric power have been the source of considerable conflict between governments and the people who are affected by such projects, especially those forced to relocate. In many instances dams are built in pristine natural areas, destroying or degrading nature reserves, indigenous lands and/or archaeological sites. Increasing opposition to large dams has resulted in national and international litigation, as well as substantial changes in the practices of international financial institutions. This case study looks at the case of the Narmada dam in India, as it has evolved over time in response to public action, national litigation, and challenges to World Bank financing. In reading these materials, consider the following issues: (1) In developing countries, do the benefits of flood control and the provision of renewable energy outweigh the environmental and human rights impacts of large dams? (2) Can equal or greater benefits be achieved by alternative development projects that have fewer negative impacts on the environment and human rights? (3) By what procedures and substantive measures can the negative impacts be avoided or mitigated? (4) Even if there are considerable benefits to hydroelectric projects, should certain locations be off-limits to the construction of large dams? If so, what are the relevant criteria by which to decide? (5) How should the rights of local communities and indigenous populations be safeguarded?