Page 914 - Week 03 - Thursday, 28 February 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The relevant provisions in the bill that became the amendment act provided that, on receiving the report from the board into the inquiry, the Full Court must confirm the conviction, confirm the conviction and recommend to the executive that it pardon the convicted person or remit his or her sentence, or quash the conviction and order a retrial.
The opposition, at the time, moved a motion during debate of the Crimes Legislation Amendment Bill 2001 which would allow the Supreme Court to quash a conviction without ordering a retrial. This amendment was inserted into the equivalent of section 430(2) of the act. A corresponding provision was not inserted into the equivalent of section 430(4). That subsection provides that a recommendation of the board into the inquiry does not bind the Supreme Court’s decision. This has the potential to create confusion. The proposed amendment is intended to remove any doubt that a recommendation of the board into the inquiry does not bind the Supreme Court’s decision.
Section 124 of the Land Titles Act 1925 prohibits the Registrar-General from making any entry on the register about the existence of an express, implied or constructive trust. This provision prohibits a person or entity being recorded on the land titles register as trustee. This is an important prohibition as it ensures only direct interests in land are recorded on the land titles register and avoids the uncertainty that would come from giving equitable interests status on the register.
On a very strict or narrow interpretation of section 124, any reference to a trust in an instrument must not be registered. The Shopping Centre Council and the ACT Law Society have raised a concern with this provision as it may have the unintended effect of preventing the registration of certain commercial trusts. These commercial leases make references to trusts within their contract terms but do not name either party to the lease agreement as a trustee.
The Shopping Centre Council and the Law Society have therefore sought clarification of the intended operation of section 124 to allow commercial leases to be registered when they refer to trusts in their terms but do not give notice of a trust on the land titles register. This bill therefore recasts section 124(1) to clarify that the Registrar-General must not enter into the register any notice of trust in relation to an interest in land if the trust creates or affects an interest in land. This technical amendment is in keeping with the policy intention of the provision while it prevents an unnecessary impediment to business.
This bill makes minor and uncontroversial amendments to the Legal Aid Act 1977. Most of these amendments are designed to broaden the categories of legal practitioners who may be appointed by the Legal Aid Commission to its panels and review committees. This is achieved, firstly, by amending the definition of “private legal practitioner” in the dictionary to the act to include an Australian legal practitioner employed by a law practice. Secondly, the term “private legal practitioner” in section 37(4) is substituted with “Australian legal practitioner” so that any legal practitioner with a practising certificate can be nominated by the Law Society and appointed by the chief executive officer of the commission. These
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video