The Basel II framework is a multilateral framework that is built entirely on three cross pollinating pillars that seek to further align the capital requirements of financial institutions on an international level. The existing 1998 Basel Capital Accord, while undoubtedly effective in increasing the standards adopted by institutions in the international market place, has had many criticisms that the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision have attempted to rectify in the new structure. The most virulent criticisms of the existing Basel I framework include the imbalance in the precise amount of capital needed for any particular institution and the failure of operational risks to be reflected in the capital adequacy ratio. Furthermore, it has also been commented that the existing risk classifications and the current 8% capital adequacy ratio, are not indicative of the current banking environment.

Continue Reading – An Explaination of the Basel II Framework in the Australian Market

Recommended – Please also checkout a list of other Publicly available Papers

Visit All Things Law Forum

All Things Law – Join and Discuss all your questions, problems, clerkships and much more for free. It’s 100% free to join and is a simple way to get the answers you’re looking for.

Mabo and Others and The State of Queensland was a High Court native title, constitutional and real property law case involving a series of claims by the Meriam peoples for native title of the Murray Islands – a series of Islands Annexed to the Colony of Queensland. The High Court upheld these claims and also commented that comparable principles should be applied to circumstances regarding the Aboriginal people on mainland Australia. The High Court’s decision fundamentally changed the manner in which land law was interrupted in Australia, predominately due to the fact that it reversed the historical doctrine of ‘terra nullis’ on which the basis of all previous British possession of land claims in Australia were based. The decision formally recognised the original and traditional customs and rights that the Meriam people had established in relation to Murray Islands. Through this action, the High Court added the legal doctrine of native title into Australian Law and confirmed that native title did pre-exist in Australia before it was colonised by the British in 1788. In recognising this prior land right, the High Court additionally held that Indigenous Australians continue to own any fraction of land in Australia which has not had its native title legally removed. Immediately preceding the decision, the Federal Government of Australia introduced the Native Title Act 19932 which attempted to clarify the High Court’s judgment, and provide a clear and definitive legislative interpretation that Indigenous Australians could use in order to could acquire recognition for land which within their native title rights.

Continue Reading – Mabo – A Case Overview

Recommended – Please also checkout a list of other Publicly available Papers

Visit All Things Law Forum

All Things Law – Join and Discuss all your questions, problems, clerkships and much more for free. It’s 100% free to join and is a simple way to get the answers you’re looking for.

The concept of self-determination and the acquisition of territorial sovereignty are highly deliberated concepts. The principal notion of self-determination is a people’s right to decide their State’s political status and its fundamental purpose in the international community. In correlation with this is the notion of territorial sovereignty which denotes the legal competence that a State enjoys in respect of its territory, and its use implies that a State retains relative control and ownership over its territory. There are five traditional modes of acquisition commonly accepted in international law– namely occupation, accretion, cession, conquest and prescription – and their contemporary significance in international law is questionable. This is primarily due to the modern requirement imposed by Courts that a State has to demonstrate it has a superior right to ‘possess a section of land’ as opposed to the actual ‘mode’ of acquisition to which the land was originally discovered and claimed.

Continue Reading – The Contemporary Significance of Territorial Sovereignty

Recommended – Please also checkout a list of other Publicly available Papers

Visit All Things Law Forum

All Things Law – Join and Discuss all your questions, problems, clerkships and much more for free. It’s 100% free to join and is a simple way to get the answers you’re looking for.

The concept of State and diplomatic immunity flows from customary international law and it is often expressed in the maxim par in parem non habet jurisdictionem, or more simply, that no State can claim jurisdiction over another. These immunities exist in order to promote stable relations between States and they are based on the notion that States will be able to conduct peaceful and passive diplomacy when they are in force. The establishment of diplomatic relations between nations takes place by their mutual consent – as stipulated in Article 2 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961. It is through this mutual Article 2 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961. It is through this mutual consent that agents of one State may enter the territory of another State and act in their official capacity. The privileges bestowed upon a diplomatic agent sent to a receiving State are such that the agent has exclusive power of the territorial sovereign to regulate and to enforce decisions of its organs while ensuring they respect the territory and the population of the receiving State. It is acknowledged that these privileges are limited to the rights bestowed by the receiving State, such that the receiving State can use reasonable force when ensuring that the activities being conducted by diplomatic agents are not in excess of the licence being conferred to them, or that their actions are in breach of international law.

Continue Reading – Sovereign & Diplomatic Immunity for War Crimes

Recommended – Please also checkout a list of other Publicly available Papers

Visit All Things Law Forum

All Things Law – Join and Discuss all your questions, problems, clerkships and much more for free. It’s 100% free to join and is a simple way to get the answers you’re looking for.

Copyright is a set of exclusive rights which are automatically assigned to an original piece of work for the purposes of protecting the creator’s skill, labor and judgment involved in the production of the work as opposed to any creative merit derived from the work1. The underlying premise for copyright protection is the impartial grant of an exclusive property right to control the replication and dissemination of the author’s work in order to moderate the supply of these works. Evidently, this secures and rewards the author with a financial incentive to keep producing the works, and acknowledges the creative effort and talent in deriving such works. Thus, it is obvious that there is a positive correlation between the financial incentive derived from the work and the degree of community recognition in endorsing the work. The recognition which is achieved by the author in the production of such works naturally spurs society to demand more of the said works, and therefore continues to stimulate the creative process forward.

Continue Reading – Works of Artistic Craftmanship and Copyright

Recommended – Please also checkout a list of other Publicly available Papers

Visit All Things Law Forum

All Things Law – Join and Discuss all your questions, problems, clerkships and much more for free. It’s 100% free to join and is a simple way to get the answers you’re looking for.