Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/15845 Record ID: c4ef7f66-8767-4a9c-8fe8-e0d7a2568540
Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Asarmas, L I S | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-06-30T23:21:56Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2022-06-30T23:21:56Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2008 | en |
| dc.identifier.citation | No 2 Vol.: 32 | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/15845 | - |
| dc.language | en | en |
| dc.title | Mixed messages on sexual assault and the statute of limitations: Stingel v clark, the ipp 'reforms' and an argument for change | en |
| dc.title.alternative | Melbourne University Law Review | en |
| dc.type | Journal Article | en |
| dc.identifier.catalogid | 12271 | en |
| dc.identifier.url | http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-77951932354&partnerID=40&md5=474b488d185069158b7b4b172a6fcfda | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | Invalid URL | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | new_record | en |
| dc.description.notes | This article examines the application of limitation periods to civil actions for sexual assault, with particular reference to the High Court of Australia's decision in Stingel v Clark and the 'reforms' enacted pursuant to the recommendations of the lpp Report In Stingel v Clark, a majority of the High Court held that under the Limitation of Actions Act 1958 (Vic) as it stood at the relevant time, the limitation period would only begin to run from the time the survivor of the sexual assault recognised the connection between the assault and the harm resulting from it. This article argues that the case was correctly decided both on grounds of correct statutory interpretation and on sound public policy. It then reviews changes that have been enacted to limitation periods in Victoria and other Australian jurisdictions based on the recommendations of the lpp Report. The article is critical of the fact that the effect of the changes in Victoria has been to erode the extension of time benefits conferred by the High Court's decision. It then examines the relevant statutory limitations provisions throughout Australia and argues that these are inconsistent, unduly complex and inadequate in the context of civil sexual assault actions. The article concludes that the only way to ensure that a consistent and just approach is taken to the issue is to enact simple and uniform legislation throughout Australia which completely eliminates the time bar in sexual assault actions.<br/ >Export Date: 23 July 2013Source: Scopus | en |
| dc.identifier.source | Melbourne University law review | en |
| dc.date.entered | 2014-07-21 | en |
| Appears in Collections: | Journal Articles | |
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.