Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 7 Hansard (18 October) . . Page.. 1815 ..
Motion (by Mr Humphries) agreed to, with the concurrence of an absolute majority:
That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent precedence being given to the following orders of the day in sequential order, when Executive business is called on:
(1) No. 7 relating to Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Bill 1995;
(2) No. 8 relating to Guardianship and Management of Property (Amendment) Bill 1995;
(3) No. 3 relating to the ministerial statement on the Australian Transport Council Meeting; and
(4) No. 4 relating to the ministerial statement on sport and recreation.
(AMENDMENT) BILL 1995
Debate resumed from 21 September 1995, on motion by Mr Humphries:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MR CONNOLLY (3.35): Mr Speaker, the Opposition is happy to cooperate, in our ever cooperative and friendly manner, and get the Government out of their hole and actually get a few Bills debated today. The Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Bill addresses a fairly small and some may say obscure, but nonetheless significant, little rule of law which emerges from the subject known as conflicts of law. Of all the more difficult and obtuse subjects that a law student goes through in order to get a law degree, most would probably agree that conflicts of law is one of the more testing, complex and little understood areas.
Buried away in the textbooks is the rule in the Mozambique case which Mr Humphries has sought to summarise in the explanatory memorandum. It is not a rule easy of summary, and I will not go further than the explanatory memorandum. Needless to say, though, it has been criticised for many years in the process of law reform. As is so often the case in the process of law reform, these little black letter provisions often get criticised by the courts, and there is often a delay in legislatures getting around to remedying them.