Ouch!

CAN YOU HEAR MARIAH CAREY AND MICHAEL BUBLE CLAWING A WAY BACK INTO YOUR SKULL LIKE THEY ARE CRYOGENICALLY FROZEN AND THAWED OUT ANNUALLY ONLY TO PUNISH YOUR SPECIES BEFORE BEING RETURNED TO THE ICE ONCE AGAIN IN JANUARY?

District Court Judge Anne Barnett said she accepted the offending was “associated with obsessional thinking rather than hostility, resentment or any suggestion of revenge.”

I would have thought posting deepfake pornography of a young woman is inherently hostile.

For anyone on here who is a barrister or has been one, have there been years you've struggled to make ends meet due to not being briefed?

Just pondering how it must feel for a fully trained barrister to have to negotiate settlements with people who don't actually want to fork over money.
I'm having a discussion with a liquidator who seems to think he can just take a months wages off me. Unfair preference, look it up! It's bs.

Anyway so we're all at the stage where the liquidator won't accept my fair offer and I won't accept his unfair offer. It's just emails going back and forth now saying number? Other number? Number but said differently?

For the interested, Number isn't very big on the scale of liquidator numbers. It's actually a drop in the bucket.

And this barrister in between is on the phone saying to me, who is just some wagey with heaps of time and no fucks, hey Number is not enough can you increase it?

Sir, you're asking me to increase Number by the equivalent of your hourly rate. How does that feel? Surely you're meant for a higher purpose.

We could do this dance all night, it's going to cost them more in their own wages than what they could ever hope to get from me.

Was the evidence portion hard for others? Just relieved it’s over for now…

I recently noticed this commercial venue on St Kilda Beach (possibly Republica) cordoning off a section of the beach to create an exclusive area restricted to paying patrons. This struck me as legally questionable, given the generally accepted principle that beaches are public spaces and should not be subject to private appropriation.

It raises an interesting question... what is the legal basis for permitting a private commercial operator to exclude the public from a portion of the foreshore (is there a basis at all)?

My baseline understanding is that the foreshore is not simply vacant land available for private appropriation. Under common law principles concerning res communes, the public character of the foreshore, and the legal significance of the mean high-water mark in determining the boundary between land and the sea, there is a substantial question as to the extent to which a private entity can lawfully assert exclusive control over part of a beach. And a private commercial operator does not acquire an inherent proprietary or possessory right to exude the public merely by virtue of operating a licensed hospitality venue adjacent to the beach.

I appreciate that public ownership does not necessarily mean that every part of Crown land must remain accessible to everyone at all times. The relevant authorities may have statutory powers to grant leases, licences, permits or other forms of authorisation, and may be able to impose temporary restrictions for particular purposes. The question, however, is whether those powers extend to authorising a private, for-profit operator to permanently cordon off part of the foreshore and reserve its use exclusively for their paying customers.

Am I missing an established legal mechanism that resolves this issue, or is the law more nuanced than the general principle that public foreshore cannot simply be appropriated for private commercial use? Or is the practice operating in a legally grey area that has yet to be tested?