Skip to content

BarNet JADE

Welcome to BarNet’s JADE suggestion system. Any ideas are good ones. We want to hear from you!

I suggest you ...

You've used all your votes and won't be able to post a new idea, but you can still search and comment on existing ideas.

There are two ways to get more votes:

  • When an admin closes an idea you've voted on, you'll get your votes back from that idea.
  • You can remove your votes from an open idea you support.
  • To see ideas you have already voted on, select the "My feedback" filter and select "My open ideas".
(thinking…)

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

If a similar idea already exists, you can support and comment on it.

If it doesn't exist, you can post your idea so others can support it.

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

116 results found

  1. bug or citation error

    I was exploring Jade Professional.

    I uploaded a brief with a citation to Damorgold Pty Ltd v JAI Products Pty Ltd (2014) 105 IPR 60. The report says the citation is wrong and should be replaced with Lahood v Bank of Western Australia (No 2).

    But the citation is correct

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  2. allow more case names to come up in the visualisations

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Content  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  3. Get older state court decisions on Jade.

    I am working with Permanent Building Society v Wheeler (1994) 11 WAR 187. It doesn't appear to be on Jade since too old. Would be great to get all decisions of state courts onto Jade. Thank you!

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Content  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  4. Getting second reading speeches on ****

    9 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Content  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  5. add Holt v Protective Commissioner (1993) 31 NSWLR 227 to Jade. It is an important decision in the protective jurisdiction.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Content  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  6. Consider better integration of user-generated content.

    I assume that the team at Jade is familiar with CaseText (https://casetext.com/), a free US legal research site. CaseText's integration of user-generated content is quite seamless and user-friendly--perhaps in ways that Jade is not. Might be worth considering.

    7 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Content  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    started  ·  AdminM Green (Director, BarNet) responded

    Hi Alexander, we do integrate user-generated content. We are working to improve the integration in our next UI improvement round happening early in Q3, 2015.

  7. allow alerts to exclude topics. I would like to receive all civil cases but not criminal cases. I can't find a way to do that.

    allow alerts to exclude topics. I would like to receive all civil cases but not criminal cases. I can't find a way to do that.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Search  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  8. separate the workers compensation cases out from the Employment, labour and industial topic, which should be reserved for employment law.

    3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    started  ·  0 comments  ·  Content  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  9. add the Defence Force Discipline Appeals Tribunal to the list of courts that are in your alerts list.

    As the DFDAT is effectively a court of appeal which sits with 3 judges from the Federal Court and the State Supreme Courts, it is superior appellate tribunal that would enhance your alerts list.

    2 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  10. Are you planning to include Tasmanian legislation in the near future?

    2 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Search  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  11. Legislation has been 'appealed'

    When I look up the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 (Vic) it says it has been appealed.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    started  ·  0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  12. Table of contents failure

    The table of contents is a real time saver.

    Here is an example of where it fails, though:
    https://jade.barnet.com.au/Jade.html#article=67936

    PFENNIG v THE QUEEN (1995) 182 CLR 461.

    Nothing gets listed in the TOC.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    started  ·  0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  13. add a category field for admiralty and shipping cases.

    4 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  14. I cannot expert rank Mennon v O'Connor [2021] FCA 598 as the case keeps closing when a select a ranking.Thanks

    0 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  15. Fix R v Ellis references in DPP v McInnes

    DPP v Mcinnes [2017] VSCA 374

    Every citation of R v Ellis redirects to R v Brazel, where it should (of course) refer to R v Ellis (1986) 6 NSWLR 603. Please fix. Thanks in anticipation.

    0 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Content  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close

  16. The link to Golan v AOTC in paragraph 83 of R v Roberts & Urbanec [2004] VSCA 1; 9 VR 295 takes one to the wrong case.

    The link to Golan v AOTC in paragraph 83 of R v Roberts & Urbanec [2004] VSCA 1; 9 VR 295 takes one to the wrong case.

    0 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Content  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
1 2 3 4 6 Next →
  • Don't see your idea?

BarNet JADE

Categories

Feedback and Knowledge Base

(thinking…)