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.

129 results found

  1. In-text searching from partway through a document

    It would be very helpful if pressing F3 when scrolled partway through a document would jump to the next search result, beginning from the top of the visible screen. This would allow a much more natural movement through the document when reviewing search hits in a document.

    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

  2. The link to Interlego AG v Croner Trading Pty Ltd (1992) 39 FCR 348 in IceTV v Nine Network (at least in footnote 41) goes to the wrong case

    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

  3. The link to Interlego AG v Croner Trading Pty Ltd (1992) 39 FCR 348 in IceTV v Nine Network (at least in footnote 41) goes to the wrong case

    Same thing happens when you click on Interlego in the search bar results - something to do with the media neutral citations issue?

    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

  4. Missing decision in Purvis precedent visualisation

    I was checking out the precedent visualisation for Purvis v The State of NSW [2003] HCA 62, and noticed the most recent decision from the Qld Court of Appeal in Woodforth v State of Queensland [2017] QCA 100 does not appear therein (https://jade.io/article/531142).

    The Woodforth decision is important in that it is the first court of appeal that rejects the application of the Purvis decision when applied to a discrimination provision that differs from that in the DDA. This case will have ripple effects in other Australian discrimination jurisdictions.

    It would be good if the visualisation tool includes it.

    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

  5. Bug - this case not loading. Malouf v Constantinou [2017] NSWSC 923

    Not loading.

    Malouf v Constantinou [2017] NSWSC 923 (13 July 2017) (Parker J)

    July 13th at 12:12 PM via Jade Equity

    Catchwords: Contracts – retainer between solicitor and client – guarantee – construction – multiple contractual documents – main object of contract – deferral of costs – termination of retainer – acceleration of deferred costs – charges of property – consent to lodgement of caveat – issue of tax invoices – interest – repugnancy ...

    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. Fix citation error

    In The Pilbara Infrastructure Pty Ltd v Australian Competition tribunal [2012] HCA 36 there are several incorrect citations at paragraph 14. Douglass v R is [2012] HCA 34, not 36.

    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

  7. This search [2000] SASC 296

    Is not picking up this decision, Re Dion Investments Pty Ltd [2013] NSWSC 1941 in the citatory.

    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. add the attached case to your database. I acted for the successful defendant! :-)

    http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/vic/VCC/2008/1621.html

    from Michael Martin

    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

  9. Fix the issue with the Springfield Nominees case. It currently links to a totally unrelated case and no citation information can be found.

    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

  10. Fix citation

    BHP v Steuler; Protec v Steuler [2014] VSCA 338; 100 ACSR 524

    check this citation. I'm not sure it is reported in 100 ACSR

    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

  11. fix this link Australian Broadcasting Corporation v XIVth Commonwealth Games Ltd (1988) 18 NSWLR 540. … which goes to Australian Securities

    Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Fortescue Metals Group Ltd
    [2011] FCAFC 19 (18 February 2011) (Keane CJ, Emmett and Finkelstein JJ); 190 FCR 364; 18 NSWLR 540; 274 ALR 731; 29 ACLC 11-015; 81 ACSR 563; 5 BFRA 220 is where the link for (1988) 18 NSWLR 540 goes to

    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

  12. estbalish the link to Mercier Rouse Street Pty Ltd v Burness & Ors [2015] VSCA 8

    does not come up in Jade

    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

  13. 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.

    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

  14. 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.

    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

  15. look at the citation for Blue Sky (HCA) - it has its wires crossed with the ANZ Savings Bank case (1998) 194 CLR 328

    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

  16. Include Fiduciary Obligations and Powers of Attorney as a topic heading for alerts

    I'd like to refine my alerts to better catch judgments concerning financial elder abuse. Adding the above topics to the alerts might help.

    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

  17. provide a detailed search history

    Provide a detailed 'search history' so that when I am creating a research note (i.e. a note detailing which terms I have searched) I can simply look back on this history and compile my note.

    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…)
    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

  18. delete account

    how do I delete my account?

    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

  19. will want to add a reference in the prior citations to https://jade.io/article/508476 for PKT Technologies Pty Ltd (formerly known as Fairli

    Please add a reference in the prior citations to https://jade.io/article/508476 for PKT Technologies Pty Ltd (formerly known as Fairlight.Au Pty Ltd) v Peter Vogel Instruments Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1587.

    Also, why do you categorise patent and trade mark cases as "Copy"?

    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

  20. Bug

    The Gulf Pacific link goes to the incorrect decision. See below.

    Caple v Wilson [2016] VSC 704

    210.The decision of Wilcox J in Krizaic indicates that a company can be liable even where it is not a party to the joint venture agreement, but its director is a party.

    211.The obverse principle can be seen in Gulf Pacific Pty Ltd v Londish,[91] where it was held that the director can be liable in equity where the joint venture agreement only binds his or her company.

    [91] [1992] FCA 502 (‘Gulf Pacific’).

    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
1 2 4 6 7
  • Don't see your idea?

BarNet JADE

Categories