law essay competition 2023 australia

Please enter your login details below to access your user dashboard

• Policy Agenda
• Member Login
• Access to Justice
• Advancing the Profession
• Criminal Law and National Security
• Human Rights
• International Law
• Regulation of the Profession and Ethics

Policy Portal

Read the LCA's Commentary on the Australian Solicitor' Conduct Rules

Read our latest submissions

Anti-money laundering vulnerabilities analysis

• Media Statements
• Media Releases

Read the latest edition LCA Update

• Submissions
• Corporate Documents
• Policies and Guidelines
• Publications

Time for Change: Addressing Sexual Harassment

Mental Health and Wellbeing in the Legal Profession

Read the latest edition of LCA Update

International Law Section

• ILS Essay Competition
• Search Search

International Law Section Essay Competition for Studies in the Law of the South Pacific

The International Law Section 2023 essay competition is now open.

Entry requirements

Essays are to explore ' The Efficacy of Existing Cross Border Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in the South Pacific Region '. Candidates have the option of submitting previously published work of up to 5,000 words or an original work not exceeding 3,000 words. Candidates will be asked to authorise their essay for publication by the International Law Section, which may publish the winning essay on the Law Council website. The winner will receive a prize value of up to $500.00 (AUD).  

Eligibility

To be eligible, a candidate must be a citizen of, or studying in, American Samoa, Australia, Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Norfolk Island, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Timor Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, or Vanuatu.  

Deadline for submissions is COB Tuesday, 28 November 2023 . Essays will be judged by the ILS South Pacific Issues Committee and the winner will be announced at the ILS Annual General Meeting on Tuesday, 12 December 2023.  

How to submit

Please email completed essay to [email protected] by COB Tuesday, 28 November 2023. For more information about the competition, please contact the Section Administrator at [email protected] .  

For more information about the competition, please contact the Section Administrator at  [email protected] .  

Competition winners

Elizabeth is a third-year undergraduate student, currently interning at Kubak and Kubak Barristers and Solicitors in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea.

Her accumulated legal research and studies over the years have influenced and developed her interests in international laws and principles and their real-world application. Born and raised in Papua New Guinea but studied extensively in Australia, Elizabeth has been exposed to the implementation and enforcement of the legal system locally and internationally. She aspires to work towards the free exercise of rights in the South Pacific with zero barriers to access of justice in PNG in the future. Elizabeth hopes to continue her international law studies and gain exposure to the changing legal climate in order to build a positive legal identity.

A copy of her essay is available here .

In addition to law, Ms Houlahan has postgraduate qualifications in science, and has previously worked in clinical and research science. Loretta enjoys utilising her STEM skills to advise on new and emerging technologies for clients.

Ms Houlahan currently works as a Senior Associate at HWL Ebsworth in the public and administrative law team. She continues her service to the Royal Australian Navy as a reservist Legal Officer and sits on several Health and Defence boards.

Click here to read  Ms Houlahan’s winning essay in 2022.

• Share this on Twitter
• Share this on LinkedIn
• Share this on Facebook

Most recent items in International Law Section

Ils webinars, australia-india economic co-operation agreement, international law section strategic plan 2022-2023, trending items in international law section, south pacific issues committee, united nations conventions on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration, inquiry by roger gyles ao qc on international arbitration.

• Commercial partnerships
• Law Society of NSW

A Class Act: AAL Annual Essay Prize Goes International

An Oxford University Law Professor and his former student have jointly won the 2023 Australian Academy of Law’s (AAL) Annual Essay Prize – by arguing against the question.

This year’s competition addressed the issue of the increase in mass torts and class actions in Australia and asked entrants to consider whether the growth of such private litigation in Australia and elsewhere could ‘be described as an evolutionary form of “privatised regulation”, gap-filling where the state and its regulators have not fully or properly controlled or deterred behaviours, or protected and compensated affected person. To what extent is it successful in that regard? Should it be encouraged? Why or why not? Give examples.’  

Professor Andrew Higgins and his former student John Yap co-authored the winning eight-thousand word essay, which presented both a critical response to the question and a fresh perspective on the issues.  

In their essay, the pair accepted that class actions as ‘privatised regulation’ has gained traction in Australia and elsewhere but argued that ‘the description is inaccurate and distorts the true relationship between regulation, tort law and procedural law.  

‘Tort law cannot be described as a form of regulation because the two are different modalities of law and the class action procedure does not change this.’ Higgins and Yap wrote.   

The judging panel included former High Court Justice, William Gummow AC KC, Federal Court Judge Catherine Button and ANU Emeritus Professor Peta Spender who said the winning entry was sophisticated, original, and provocative and is sure to generate further debate about this controversial area.  

Professor Higgins is a practising barrister in Victoria and Oxford University Professor of Civil Justice Systems at the Law Faculty and a Fellow in Law at Mansfield College. He teaches and convenes the BCL/MJur Principles of Civil Procedure course and FHS Civil Dispute Resolution course.   

John Yap has just completed his Oxford Bachelor of Civil Law and currently teaches contract law at Mansfield College, while going through the arduous process of qualifying as a barrister in London.  

Higgins says he did not hesistate in joining forces with his former student and described Yap as an extraordinarily bright student with useful insights into whatever area of law he turns his mind to.  

“My main areas of academic research and teaching are civil justice systems and tort law. Also, as a practising barrister, I specialise in mass tort litigation so the question for this year’s competition felt like my lucky numbers had come up. Because I’ve spent a lot of time thinking and writing about what class actions are designed and not designed to do, I felt almost professionally obliged to submit an entry.” Higgins said.  

Yap says he developed a keen interest in private law remedies and the principles of civil procedure during his studies and when he saw the AAL essay question, it was the perfect opportunity to explore his ideas in depth with his former teacher.  

“Andrew taught me in these areas, and I hoped that my thoughts on the current academic debates would complement his expertise and experience in class actions and mass torts litigation. I am honoured that he agreed to co-author the essay with me.” Yap said.  

The winning authors are delighted to have won the competition and for Yap, the shared $10,000 award is particularly helpful.  

“As a current bar course student in London, the generous prize from the AAL is welcome support along what can sometimes feel like a never-ending journey to qualifying as a barrister.” Yap said.  

Launched in 2015, the AUD$10,000 prize is open to anyone, anywhere who is studying or has studied legal subjects at a tertiary level, or who is working or has worked in a law-based occupation.  

The winning essay is on the AAL website and will be published in an upcoming edition of the Australian Law Journal.  

• Australian Academy of Law
• Class Action
• law students

Related Articles

DV bail reforms pass parliament

eSafety Commissioner abandons court action over church stabbing video

Parliamentary report recommends federal Human Rights Act

Call for submissions: Kim Santow Law and Social Justice Essay Prize

The Essay Prize is possible due to the gifts that have been made by donors to the Kim Santow Memorial Fund. 

The Essay Prize will be awarded in association with the annual Kim Santow Expert Panel on Law and Social Justice which will take place on Thursday 30 November 2023.  

The Essay Prize is open to students enrolled in an LLB or JD program at an Australian University.  In 2023, essays must be submitted by 6 November 2023, responding this proposition:

What policy initiative/s would best enable you to pursue a career in social justice?

Please direct any inquiries to Ms Anastasia Radievska at < [email protected] >. 

Rules for the competition are below.

Kim Santow Law and Social Justice Essay Prize 2023: Rules

• 1. The  Kim Santow Law and Social Justice Essay Prize is open to any student enrolled in an LLB or JD degree program at an Australian tertiary institution at the time of submission or within the previous six months.
• 2. Essays must have been written in the 12 months before the submission deadline. Essays that have been written for assessment in a degree program may be submitted, as written or adapted.
• 3. A person may not submit more than one essay to the Competition in any given year.
• 4. Essays must respond to the following proposition: What [policy change/initiative] would best enable you to pursue a career in social justice?.
• 5. Essays must be no more than 3,500 words. Essays exceeding this word limit will not be accepted. Footnotes and a bibliography (required), are not included in the final word count.
• 6. Essays must be submitted as a .pdf document by email to < [email protected] >.
• 7. The deadline for submission of essays is 5.00 pm (AEDT) on Monday 6 November, 2023. No extensions will be given.
• 8. Essays must meet the highest standards of academic integrity, and be fully and accurately referenced according to a recognised referencing standard (eg, AGLC, Harvard, MLA).
• 9. Each person submitting an essay must declare that the essay is the person’s own original work. By submitting an essay, a person agrees that Sydney Law School may conduct an integrity check for copyright infringement or plagiarism.
• 10. An essay that is submitted to the Competition must be accompanied by a separate cover page stating:  a.     the author’s name, contact email and telephone number b.     a declaration of enrolment (see rule 1) c.     a declaration of time (see rule 2) d.     a declaration of integrity (see rule 9)
• 11. So that it can be marked anonymously, a submitted essay must not include any information – for example in a header or footer – that identifies the author.
• 12. Eligible essays will be anonymised and reviewed by a panel of experts against the following criteria: 1.  Novelty : does the essay address a cutting-edge issue and/or contribute a novel perspective or analysis to the question 2.  Argument : is the argument clear, compelling, well-developed and supported by evidence? 3.  Clarity and structure : is the essay written clearly and concisely, and organised in a logical and effective way? 4.  Accuracy : is the essay presented neatly and legibly, with few or no content, typographical, grammatical and referencing errors?
• 13. The best essay will be announced on 30 November, 2023 at the Kim Santow Experts Panel on Social Justice at the Sydney Law School. The decision of the judging panel is final.
• 14. The judging panel may in its discretion decline to award prizes.
• 15. Subject to rule 14, the author of the Winning Essay will each receive a prize of AUD$1000.
• 16. The author of the Winning Essay will be offered academic support and advice to revise their work for submission for publication.
• 17. The author of the Winning Essay agrees that if their essay is published (by any means, in any forum), that its publication will be accompanied by an acknowledgment that the essay won the Prize in the relevant year.

Study Bachelor of Laws

Related articles, global peace conference in bangkok: a nexus of insights and inspiration, scholarship sends two sydney law school graduates to harvard, alumnus sets sights on cambridge with help of scholarship.

• Current students
• Content manager

ANU Arts-Law student Archie Horneman-Wren wins national 2023 Australian Legal History Essay Competition

Photo provided by Francis Forbes Society.  Left to right: Hon. Andrew Bell, Chief Justice of NSW, Archie Horneman-Wren.

'The Mabo decision proved that Australian law and history are mutually inclusive. If it were not for history’s proper understanding of Australian settlement, Mabo would never have overturned terra nullius. And, if it were not for Mabo, neither legal nor historical scholarship would have possessed the requisite authority to speak about Australian nationhood with a new direction. Mabo gave both disciplines the narrative foundations necessary to conceive of our future on new (or ancient) grounds, from which Indigenous peoples had never disconnected.’  

- Argument, from conclusion of Archie Horneman-Wren’s winning essay.

ANU Arts-Law student Archie Horneman-Wren has won the Francis Forbes Society's 2023 Australian Legal History Essay Competition. The prize was presented as part of the Society’s 12th Annual Plunkett Lecture, chaired by the Hon. James Allsop AC, President of the Forbes Society and former Chief Justice of the Federal Court of Australia. The award was presented by the Hon. Andrew Bell, Chief Justice of NSW, at the Banco Court in the Law Courts Building, Sydney.

Archie won in the Tertiary category, an award offered annually by the Society to ‘recognise excellence in the study of Australian legal history’ for his winning essay, titled, “'The Facts as We Know Them Today': Law, Narrative, and the Mabo Decision as an Exercise in Australian Historiography’”. The judges noted that it rose to the top in an especially strong round of entries. He received a certificate and took home $1,000 in prize money.

“Something about Mabo changed how we think about ourselves as Australians. Suddenly and powerfully, an indisputable fact of Australia’s past was authorised by our legal system. Understanding the nation is a huge passion of mine. So, I wanted to investigate that question: how does law determine who we are?” he explains.

Archie’s essay, which draws from both his legal and historical studies, began as his major project for Making History (HIST3007), the capstone course for a History Major, which requires students to write an original essay using primary sources on a topic of their choosing.

“This essay was a chance to do something I never expected to achieve in my Arts/Law double degree: to make it truly interdisciplinary. The seeds of the argument came from my earliest readings in first and second year Law. But I was frustrated that lawyers didn’t seem to understand history, just as historians underappreciated the power of law within society. I saw Professor Thomas’ course as a unique opportunity to combine the disciplines,” Archie comments.

Honoured to receive the accolade, Archie says, “All I’ve written over the last three years has been for myself and my Lecturers, but I always felt I had ideas to contribute to History in unique ways, and to Law in more meaningful ways. To share this essay with the Francis Forbes Society was exciting enough — to have received such recognition will encourage me for years to come.”

Professor Martin Thomas, who taught Archie in Making History, described the essay as, “a penetrating meditation on history, the law, and the nexus between the two.”

AUSTRALASIAN SOCIETY OF LEGAL PHILOSOPHY

Essay competition.

The ASLP Essay Competition is designed to encourage original research and writing in legal theory and philosophy of law by early career scholars around the world. The author of the winning essay will receive a cash prize of AU$1,000, plus a contribution of up to AU$500 towards the cost of attendance at the Society’s annual conference to present the essay as a paper.

Who can take part?

The competition is open to students currently enrolled in a postgraduate degree program (Master or Doctoral) in any discipline. Graduates in one discipline reading for a first degree in a different discipline (such as a Juris Doctor) are not eligible.

Submission process and deadline

Submissions may be on any topic in legal theory or the philosophy of law. Essays must be in English and not exceed 15,000 words (including notes, references, headings, etc). 

It is a condition of being awarded the ASLP Essay Prize that the winning essay be submitted for publication in the next issue of the Journal of Legal Philosophy . Note that the essay will still need to go through the review process and that publication is not guaranteed.

Submissions for the 2023 Competition closed on 31 December 2023. The winner was Levin Güver (University College London), whose entry was entitled "Untangling the Gordian Know of Motive". Submissions for the 2024 Competition will open later in the year.

Become a member

PHOTO, Left to right: Dr Jeremy Coggins and Dr Jessica Viven-Wilksch (Joint Winners 2023 Brooking Prize), Dr Matthew Bell (Chair Brooking Prize Judging Panel)

The Society offers the Brooking Prize annually for the best essay submitted in the field of construction law.   It is named after The Hon Robert Brooking AO KC in recognition of his Honour’s pioneering contribution to the study and practice of construction law in Australia.  

We are excited to announce that from 2023 we are regularising the timing of the Brooking Prize so that it will always be due on the last Friday in September.

The winner of the 2024 Brooking Prize will be announced at the Stynes Address in November 2024.

Papers are now invited for the 2024 Brooking Prize.

The Society is delighted to announce the following prize offering for 2024:   Brooking Prize – A$5,000   Brooking Student Prize – A$2,000   High Commendation – A$1,000 (General), A$500 (Student)   Commendation – A$500 (General), A$250 (Student)    

All entrants awarded a prize or commendation will, in addition, be granted complimentary membership of the Society for one year.

In addition, the Brooking Prize winner will be invited to present their paper at the Society’s 2025 National Conference.  Complimentary conference registration together with a travel and accommodation allowance (if the conference is not held in the winner’s home city) of $1,000.00 will also be provided by the Society.   

Entries must be submitted in Microsoft Word format and received by 4.00pm Sydney time on Friday 27 September 2024.

Further information can be found in the Rules .

2023 Brooking Prize Results

The Society is delighted to announce the following results of the 2023 Brooking Prize.

2023 Brooking Prize

Is there a compelling case for a prescribed Construction Code of Conduct to help correct market failure in the commercial sector of the Australian construction industry?   by Dr Jessica Viven-Wilksch and Dr Jeremy Coggins

Highly Commended - General Division

The approach to Delay Analysis: Well, what does the contract say?    by Jos Mulcahy (2024) (now published at 33(4) Building and Construction Law Bulletin 28

Third Party Losses on Building Contracts: Should the Panatown Principle be accepted into Australian Law?   by Paul Tamburro 

Highly Commended - Student Division

A duty of care to prevent pure economic loss in building defect cases: Is legislative reform the answer? by Peter Matic  Weaning Off Expert Witnesses: The Case for Single, Independent Experts in Australian Construction Disputes by Aaron Hollis 

Commended - General Division

Delay Analysis – Prospective, Retrospective and the Bwllfa Rationale by Ian Thorpe (now published at (2024) 215 Australian Construction Law Newsletter  6) Unravelling Complexity: Towards a More Accessible Adjudication Process for Low-Value Claims by Ali Alkhatatneh and Dr Samer Skaik

Commended - Student Division

The challenge to timely completion of underground works: A discussion on the use of contractual techniques to mitigate exposure to delays   by Ian Tang 

The Brooking Student Prize was not awarded for 2023.

Dr Matthew Bell (Chair, Judging Panel)

Past Brooking Prize Results

2022 brooking prize.

'Come On Ref!': Bulk, Disputed Expert Referrals of Construction Litigation in Queensland   by Nick Wray-Jones and James Aird (now published at [2023] International Construction Law Review 384)

The Privatisation of Justice: Is Arbitration Impacting the Development of Australian Construction Law?  by Paul Tamburro  (n ow published at [2023] International Construction Law Review 139)

Is there a place for retention in today's construction industry? by Jeremy Coggins and Mitchell Francis (now published at [2023] International Construction Law Review 82)

Suppressing Subjectivity – Objectively Quantifying Risk Allocation in Construction Contracts by Kiri Parr and Kevin Pascoe (now published at (2023) 38 Building and Construction Law 482)  

The Prevention Principle and the Doctrine of Penalties by Trevor Thomas (now published at (2023) 40 International Construction Law Review 43)

Five years on: An Empirical Review of Domestic Building Dispute Resolution Victoria by Jayne Kelly

2021 Brooking Prize

The unilateral power to extend time:  Is discretion still the better part of valour? by Jos Mulcahy (now published at (2021) 200 Australian Construction Law Newsletter 22)

Welcome to the “party” – the scope of arbitration agreements and third party claims following Rinehart v Hancock Prospecting by Joshua Bridgett

Should Australia move to a hybrid model for the delivery of mega infrastructure projects?  by Trevor Thomas (now published at (2022) 203 Australian Construction Law Newsletter 16)

Double the Trouble – Withdrawing Payment Claims and Section 13(5) of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) by Roy Leigh

Addressing the elephant in the room: the inadequate adjudicator regulations in NSW  by Dr Samer Skaik ( now published at (2021) 37 Const. L.J., Issue 7 © 2021)

2020 Brooking Prize

For Fetter or Worse: The Fettering Doctrine in Government Building Contracts  by Paul Tamburro (now published at (2021) 36 Building and Construction Law 433)

Confusion reigns? The effectiveness of contractual provisions which seek to limit liability under the Australian consumer law  by Joshua Bridgett

Cracking the Code: Claims, Consultants and Ethics in the Construction Industry  by Petrina Macpherson

The Successful Delivery of Infrastructure Projects – Fantasy or an Achievable Reality?  by Laina Chan

Construction disputes after COVID-19 - jaw-jaw or war-war?     by Dr Donald Charrett  (Now published at (2020) 193 ACLN 6)

Should parent companies be primarily liable to pay on demand for the acts of their contractor subsidiaries?  by Tina Funge

The duty to warn and the combustible cladding crisis by Owen Hayford (now published at (2021) 36 Building and Construction Law 332)

Providing a safe harbour for insolvent contractors – a proposal for Commonwealth reform to divergent security of payment legislation  by Christopher Hibbard and Sean Kelly

Will COVID-19 cure the poor health of the Australian construction industry?   (now published at (2021) 197 ACLN 16) by Kiri Parr and Kevin Pascoe

In which payment trust should the Australian construction industry place its trust? ( now published at Insolvency Law Journal, 2020, Vol 28 (3), 113) by Bianca Teng and Dr Jeremy Coggins

Commended - Student Division

Security of Payment Laws: Singing in the same key, if not from the same songbook  by Andrew Serb

2019 Brooking Prize 

'Levelling the Playing Field’ – A proposal for the regulation of unfair contract terms in construction contracts by Dr Jeremy Coggins (now published at  (2019) 35 ConstLJ 271 (link is external) )

2019 Brooking Student Prize 

Protecting David from Goliath: Why Harmonising Australian Security of Payment Laws is not in Queensland's Best Interests by Jane Evelyn

Contractors, Owners and Banks: relationships built on trust and security? by Daniel Morris

'Out-of-pocket' security, out of control? by Tina Funge (Now published at [2020] International Construction Law Review 4)

The early resolution of construction disputes – has the High Court changed the game? by William Marshall (Now published at [2020] International Construction Law Review 43)

Is it ever appropriate to employ a prospective delay analysis for a time distant event, in a dispute context? by Catherine Williams ( Now published at (2020) 193 ACLN 20)

2018 Brooking Prize

Brooking Prize 2018

‘All Promise Outruns the Performance’ – The Enforceability of Extended Promises in Construction Contracts by Dominic Fawcett and Hugh Hadgraft (QLD).  ( Now published at (2018) 34 BCL 263).

Brooking Student Prize 2018

The Brooking Student Prize was not awarded for 2018.

Highly Commended – General Division

"Do Early Contractor Involvement Contracts used in NSW Government Projects Promote Legitimate Collaboration?" by Tina Funge (NSW).

Highly Commended – Student Division

" Constructive Acceleration in the UAE: A Matter of Contract, Law or Good Faith? " by Stefan Pislevik (VIC).  (Now published at (2019) 36 International Construction Law Review 50).

" Substandard Balconies are Flooding the Victorian Market: The Legal Context of Causes and Remedies " by Catherine Williams (SA).  (Now published at (2018) 181 Australian Construction Law Newsletter 37).

Commended – General Division

"Is Conventional Insurance for Construction Projects Fit for Purpose?" by Dr Donald Charrett (VIC). (Now published at (2018) 34 BCL 253).

"Adjudication in South Africa: Heading in the Wrong Direction?" by Michelle Kerr (South Africa) and Dr Samer Skaik (VIC). (Now published at Const. L.J. 2018, 34(6), 483-494).

"Smart Contracts in Construction" by Natalie Kozlov (NSW)

2017 Brooking Prize 

Brooking prize 2017.

"Locked behind Time Bars" by Antoine Smiley (UK/ NSW), Raeesa Rawal (Germany / NSW) (published at [2018] International Construction Law Review 60)

Student Brooking Prize 2017

"Incorporating Active Risk Management in Construction Contracts" by Kevin Pascoe (Qld) (published at (2018) 33 BCL 333)

Highly Commended: General Division

"Political Flim-Flam or Ground-Breaking Reform?  A comment on the Code for the Tendering and Performance of Building Work 2016" (published at (2017) 177 ACLN 6)  by Elizabeth Pearson (NSW)

Highly Commended: Student Division

"Terrorism as an Unforeseen Intervening Event in International Construction Projects" by Tina Funge (NSW)

Commended: General Division

"Does Equity Undermine Construction Contract risk?" ( now published at (2017) 175 ACLN 44) by Chris Lenz (QLD)

"Is a DAB Member Appointment Enforceable if One/ Both Parties Do(es) Not Sign a Dispute Adjudication Agreement in Connection with FIDIC Contracts?" by Laura Lintott (UK)

"Factoring in a Change to Infrastructure Delivery" by Justin O’Callaghan and Lucy Munt (Qld)

"Prospective Analysis – What does it Mean?" by Mark Griffiths (NSW)

Commended: Student Division

"Reviving the Victorian Adjudication Review Mechanism Process" ( An expanded version of this paper is published in (2017) 33 Const. L.J 291) by Samer Skaik (VIC)

2016 Brooking Prize

Brooking prize 2016.

“Against Cavendish: Towards a procedural conception of the penalty doctrine” (revised version published at (2016) 33(4) International Construction Law Review 452) by Thomas Ho (Hong Kong)

Student Brooking Prize 2016

“With great power there must also come - great responsibility:  Reining in unbridled expert determinations” by Alisa Taylor (ACT)

“Defective buildings and pure economic loss claims: the return to an exclusionary rule?” (published at (2016) 32 BCL 233) by Adrian Baron (Qld)

“Keeping the faith – in support of the good faith clause and definition in the draft Australian Standards 11000 construction contract” (published at (2016) 168 ACLN 14) by William Marshall (Dubai)

“Back to the in futuro: Preserving parties’ contractual rights and remedies after termination” by Raeesa Rawal (VIC)

“Taking statutory adjudication to the next level: legislative review mechanisms of erroneous determinations ” (published at International Construction Law Review Journal (2016) Volume 33, part 3, p 287) by Samer Skaik (VIC)

“Dispute Boards in Public Private Partnerships: Best practice or an impossible dream? ” (published at (2016) 32 BCL 300) by Michael Van Der Ende (WA)

“ Difficulties with harmonisation of security of payment legislation across Australia – is federalism a friend or foe? ” by Maria Farrar (WA)

“ Expert determination: Beyond the law? ” by Chris Horsfall (VIC)

“ The interpretation of commercial suretyship obligations: Recent trends in the application of the strictissimi juris rule ” by Sean Kelly (VIC)

“ Security of payment claims in Victoria: possible developments in the law regarding disputed variations following Branlin and SSC Plenty ” by Leighton Moon (VIC)

“ Pure economic loss following Brookfield Multiplex v Owners Corporation Strata Plan 61288 (2014) 254 CLR 185 ” by Andrew Stephenson and Jaclyn Smith (VIC)

“ Sustainable construction: Developments and opportunities ” by Jody Williams (VIC)

“The prevention principle: Do express words validate unconscionability?”by Tracy Albin (WA)

“To what extent has case law separated the Australian and UK courts’ approach to global claims?” by James Millen

2015 Brooking Prize  

“Delivering Infrastructure in the Developing World: Do International Investment Agreements provide adequate protection to foreign participants?”, William Marshall (UAE)

“Deconstructing the Courts' Approach to Construction”, Josh Singer (Vic)

“ Retrospectivity and the Doctrine of Frustration ” (Published at [2015]  International Construction Law Review  455)  Rachel Ong (Vic)

“Confidentiality in International Arbitration: Towards Uniformity”, Zan Mazharullah        (Vic)

2014 Brooking Prize  

Brooking prize 2014.

“ Quo Vadimus: The Future of Restitutionary Quantum Meruit in Australian Construction Law ” (Published as 'Restitution sans rescission: Exposing the myth of a fallacy' at (2015) 89  Australian Law Journal  117) Daniel Morris

Highly Commended: General Division 

“Time Bars in construction contracts will not attract the Penalty Doctrine” ( Published at (2014) 157  Australian Construction Law Newsletter  23)  Chris Harriss

“The recovery of negligently inflicted pure economic loss – what is proximity, and why does it matter?”, Robby Bernstein and Andrew Archer

“A comparative analysis of the legal approach in differing jurisdictions to the construction of contracts through the use of extrinsic evidence”, Andrew Robertson

“Independence and Impartiality: an inadequacy of institutional arbitration rules under English law”, Daniel Shaw

“The case for exclusion of liability clauses in process contracts following  Tercon Contractors Ltd v British Columbia (Transportation and Highways)”, Jaclyn Smith

2013 Brooking Prize  

Joint winners brooking prize 2013 – general division.

“Why the sound and fury? Enforcing security of payment judgment debts” (Published at (2013) 29(5) Building and Construction Law 372)  Brian Mason, Melbourne

“ Kable , and the Constitutional Validity of the  Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004  (Qld)” (Published at (2013) 29(6)  Building and Construction La w 452)  Jean Hamilton-Smith, Brisbane

Brooking Prize 2013 – Student Division

“Penalties Percolating Through the Construction Industry” (Published at (2013) 29(3) Building and Construction Law 233)  Patrick Easton, Melbourne,

“Rethinking the contractual context for Building Information Modelling (BIM) in the Australian built environment industry”, Ilsa Kuiper, Dr Dominik Holzer, Melbourne

“Regulating the Great War: Are Stricter Industrial Relations Laws Needed for the Construction Industry?”, Raeesa Rawal, Luci Georgeson, Melbourne

“Completion Windows”, Justin O'Callaghan, Brisbane

“International approaches to the legal analysis of concurrent delay.  Is there a solution for Australian law?”, Matthew Cocklin, London, UK

“Building Information Modelling and Intellectual Propertization: A Revolutionary Nirvana or a Disillusionment?” Dr Oluwole Alfred Olatunji, Perth

“The impact of post-disaster legislative and regulatory changes on the recovery of the built environment”, Sandeeka Mannakkara, Dr Suzanne Wilkinson, Auckland NZ

“No Way, No How, No Leapfrog— Recent Developments on Direct Payment Claims by Nominated Subcontractors” (Published in a revised version at [2014]  International Construction Law Review  159)  Dr Devin S Lin, Hong Kong

“Buyer Beware? The Current Australian Position on the Liability that a Contractor Owes to a Subsequent Owner of a Building” (Published at (2013) 150  Australian Construction Law Newsletter  50)  Jaclyn Smith

2012 Brooking Prize

At the dinner for the International Construction Law Conference in Melbourne on 7 May 2012, the following results were announced by the Hon Robert Brooking AO QC

Brooking Prize 2012 – General Division

“Deconstructing Constructive Acceleration”, David Trinder, Perth

Brooking Prize 2012 – Student Division

“On Proprietary Trespass: The Availability and Application of Hypothetical Bargain Damages”, Brian Mason, Melbourne

“ Bribery Act 2010  and the Construction Industry or How Max Proffitt went to Prison ”, Laura Teodorescu, United Kingdom  (Published at (2019) 35 Construction Law Journal 77)

“The Australian Construction Code of Ethics”, Sean F McCarthy, Canberra

“ Qclng Pipeline v Mcconnell Dowell : Opening the Door to Court Merit Review of the Adjudicator's Decision”, Philip J Eyre, United Kingdom

“Legislating Floor Numbering in Hong Kong” (Published at [2015]  International Construction Law Review  173)  Devin S. Lin, Hong Kong

“The Making of the Ideal Construction Law Graduate: How Can Law Students Cover All Bases and Hit a Home Run?”, Raeesa Rawal, Melbourne

Brooking Prize 2011

At the function held in Melbourne on 19 May 2011, the following results were announced by the Hon. Robert Brooking AO QC

Highly Commended

“Time-bars and the prevention principle: using fair extensions of time and common-sense causation” (Published at (2012) 28 Construction Law Journal 379)  Dado Hrustanpasic, Melbourne

“The Search for the ‘Forgotten Tort’”, Adrian Baron, Brisbane

“Ministerial Call-In Powers in Relation to Construction Development Applications – A Comparison of Their Scope and Application in Victoria and the United Kingdom”, Anders Axelson, Melbourne

“A common construction law – or  vive la difference ?” (Published at [2012]  International Construction Law Review  72)  Dr Donald Charrett, Melbourne,

“Is expert immunity from suit a thing of the past in construction law?”, Phebe Mann, Buckingham, UK

In accordance with the advertised Prize rules, the Society exercised its discretion not to award a First or Second Prize this year

Brooking Prize 2010

The following sets out the results of the judging of the 2010 Brooking Prize as announced by the Hon. Robert Brooking AO QC at the Society’s inaugural conference in Perth on 19 June 2010

First Prize

“Alliancing Contracts and Fiduciary Duties: Trust and Confidence in Relationship Contracting”, (Published at (2011) 28  International Construction Law Review  364)  Trevor Thomas, Melbourne

Second Prize

“No Dispute – testing the wisdom of Abrahamson” ( Published at (2010) 21  Insurance Law Journal  96)  David Ulbrick, Melbourne

“The Status of the Prevention Principle” ( Published at (2011) 27  Construction Law Journal  15)   Moshe Ross, Melbourne

“ Syndicating Performance Risk in Major Projects”, Justin O’Callaghan, Brisbane

“Scholarship in Australian Construction Law”, Wayne Jocic, Melbourne

“Fabrication of Unjust Enrichment” ( Published at (2010) 26  Building and Construction Law  314)  Romauld Andrew

“ Ethics in Construction”, Sean McCarthy, Canberra

“ Rethinking Risk: Government Support for Debt Financing in PPPs Post GFC”, Tina Zange, Melbourne

“US Copyright Law in the Protection of intellectual Property Rights and Interests of Architects and Engineers”, Phebe Mann, Buckingham, UK 

• Facebook Icon
• Linkedin Icon
• Twitter Icon

• Conference & Events / Awards and Prizes / Essay Prize

Energy & Resources Law National Essay Prize

The Energy & Resources Law Association – is pleased to offer the following prizes for an essay dealing with an aspect of Resources or Energy Law:

First Prize $1,500 AUD 24 months free membership of the Energy & Resources Law Association Second Prize $750

24 months free membership of the Energy & Resources Law Association

Third Prize 12 months free membership of the Energy & Resources Law Association

Eligibility

All persons resident in Australia or ASEAN countries, who are:

a)       currently enrolled in either an undergraduate or postgraduate Juris Doctor study in law; or

b)      currently enrolled in a Masters degree in law; or

c)       holders of an undergraduate or postgraduate Juris Doctor degree in law until the sixth anniversary of graduation.

Essay subject matter

The subject matter of the essay must deal with an aspect of Resources or Energy Law.  The length must be at least 3,000 - 10,000 words.  The style and citation should conform with conventional law review style (see ARELJ Notes for Authors )

Publication

The winning essay will be considered for publication in the Australian Resources and Energy Law Journal and the writer may be invited to present the paper at the Energy & Resources Law Association Annual Conference or (if applicable) their local State Conference. Submission Deadline

Deadline for submission of essays is Friday 15 December 2023 .

Essays should be submitted in word format to Jamie Moffat (Administration Coordinator) and Regina Yap (Essay Competition Coordinator), at the below email addresses:

Jamie Moffat Telephone:  03 9248 5400 Email: [email protected]  

Regina Yap Telephone:  08 9488 3763 Email: Regina@Yap @allens.com.au

PRINT VERSION OF FLYER HERE