Skip to content

BarNet JADE

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

136 results found

  1. Remove dual-factor login

    The new requirement to not only login, but also to obtain a code through your email, is slow and buggy.

    I keep being told I have received a verification code, but have not. I have checked my spam folder. I have clicked 'resend'. This happens repeatedly.

    What used to be a quick and enjoyable user experience has become a slow and painful one.

    Here's hoping Jade removes this unnecessary dual-factor login by default.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  2. 1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  3. 1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  4. 1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  5. Cease hijacking of browser search function

    The shortcut in browsers to "find" is hijacked by jade, the result being that my searches end up contaminated.

    If trying to look for a string in a case, the browser search function allows navigation without rerunning the search and without affecting the forward and back function of the browser. However, the use of the find shortcut is denied by jade instead forcing use of its filters and the next/previous buttons (in Jade) move a little, causing inadvertent closing of the search.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  6. 1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  7. Have a button for each case where you can report that the wrong decision has been linked to the citation

    The MNC for Wolter v Broomhall [2023] ACTSC 331 is currently linking to DPP v Curtis-Hodge - https://jade.io/article/1054161, and there is no obvious way to report the error

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  8. 1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  9. Why did this happen

    Suddenly and of its own accord in the last week, Jade, rather than sending me each morning the selection of cases I set up years ago, is serving up 100 cases and legislative events. Very annoying.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  10. 1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  11. fix the TAB of this case: Decision restricted [2021] NSWCCA 74. The name of the case (Steele v The Queen) still appears in the TAB.

    fix the TAB of this case: Decision restricted [2021] NSWCCA 74. The name of the case (Steele v The Queen) still appears in the TAB.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  12. 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)
    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)
  13. 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)
    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)
  14. 0 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  15. Incorrect link

    The link to Khoshaba in Stubbings v Jams 2 Pty Ltd [2022] HCA 6 is incorrect

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
  16. 1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    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)
1 2 3 4 5 7 Next →
  • Don't see your idea?