cearta.ie – Page 51 – the Irish for rights

The third session of Thursday’s CAVE Seminar (pdf) on the National Strategy for Higher Education (the Hunt Report) divided into two workshops, one on Research (facilitator: Dr Aiden Seery (TCD); rapporteur: Dr Joan Lalor (TCD)), the other on Teaching and Learning (facilitator: Dr Ciara O’Farrell (TCD); rapporteur: yours truly). The workshops discussed many of the themes of the first two panels, and the rapporteurs’ reports to the final plenary session allowed those discussions to engage with one another. Proceeding from their separate starting points, there was a great deal of convergence in the analysis and conclusions of the two workshops, not least their agreement as to the flaws in the Hunt Report.

Both workshops bemoaned that modern policy is driving a wedge between research on the one hand, and teaching and learning on the other, as reflected in the titles and focus of the two workshops! Both workshops felt that it is crucial for HE to maintain and insist upon parity of esteem of between teaching and learning, on the one hand, with research on the other. However, both workshops felt that government policies and institutional strategies are increasingly favouring a particular kind of research. State funding is mostly for research, since it is easy to ascertain certain research inputs (money) and to measure certain research outputs (for example, PhD numbers, or peer-reviewed publications in the “right” journals in the “right” databases).…

Snarking the Hunt – II – The Student Experience

21 April, 20127 November, 2012

| 1 Comment

| Conferences, Lectures, Papers and Workshops, Irish Society, Universities

The second panel of Thursday’s CAVE Seminar (pdf) on the National Strategy for Higher Education (the Hunt Report) concerned The Student Experience. It was chaired by Dr Patrick Geoghegan (TCD), and featured Martin McAndrew (Vice President, TCD GSU), Dr Mary-Liz Trant (HEA), Dr Austin Hanley (Athlone IT), and Dr Aiden Kenny (TUI). There were several connections between the first panel and this one. Two stood out. In this morning’s panel, Tony welcomed the emphasis in Hunt on generic skills as an important aspect teaching and learning, and he argued that there is no inherent conflict between academic values and employability skills. By way of contrast, in this panel, Austin recalled the negative impact of fees on student participation, and commented that “you have to have the opportunity to go to College to have a student experience”. Both of these themes recurred throughout this second panel.

Aiden explicitly argued that quality and cuts are antithetical, and although academic staff have so far managed to maintain academic quality and standards, a crisis point is nearing: the mounting workload is not sustainable, and (recalling a point made by Mike and Erika in the first panel) and the voice of academic expertise seems excluded from the development of policy in this area.…

Snarking the Hunt – I – Who pays for College?

19 April, 20127 November, 2012

| 3 Comments

| Conferences, Lectures, Papers and Workshops, Irish Society, Universities

I spent this morning at a fascinating Seminar (pdf) on the National Strategy for Higher Education (the Hunt Report, which I blogged here), organised by my TCD colleagues Dr Andrew Loxley, Dr Aiden Seery, and Dr John Walsh, (CAVE, School of Education, TCD). This is the first of ~~four~~ three blogposts about the event. The first panel concerned Who pays for College? Expansion and Sustainability in Higher Education. It was chaired by Prof Maria Slowey (DCU), and featured Mike Jennings (IFUT), Tony Donohoe (IBEC), Ryan Bartlett (President, TCD SU; and student in School of Education, TCD), and Dr Erika Doyle (TRSA).

In her introduction, Maria pointed out that the question of “who pays?” is much broader than fees, hence questions of expansion and sustainability in the subtitle.

Mike began his very witty presentation by observing that the Hunt Report is underwhelming and full of internal contradictions. Erika similarly observed that the Report is long on aspiration, but short on detail. And both of them felt that it betrays its lack of engagement with serving academics; and they and Ryan all observed that, where there are bars to access to higher education (HE), one family member may not be able to go to College to allow another to do so.…

Today

13 April, 201216 April, 2012

| No Comments

| General

As I explained for this date last year, I spent lunch-time listening to Our Lady’s Choral Society‘s annual performance of highlights from Handel’s Messiah on the site on Fishamble Street, Dublin, on which it had its world première on this day in 1742. The image above is a photo of the performance (click on it for a larger image). Unusually for Dublin, and thankfully, the rain stayed away! Update: here’s a report in the Irish Times and another in the Irish Independent.

And the performance was great, especially the audience-participation “Hallelujah Chorus” encore. I’m looking forward to next year already. …

Open justice and closed tribunals: refugee hearings and the Rule of Law

13 April, 20126 December, 2022

| 6 Comments

| Freedom of Expression, Media and Communications, Open Justice, The Rule of Law

In a previous post, I considered the common law and constitutional aspects of the principle of open justice. In Wednesday’s Irish Times, Carol Coulter reported on a case in which a child asylum seeker is alleging perceptible bias on the part of a member of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. At present, the applicant is seeking leave to bring judicial review proceedings against the rejection of her asylum application, and the leave hearing is expected in the coming months. In an accompanying story, Coulter discussed previous cases which have challenged the secrecy and perceived unfairness of the Tribunal. That reference to “secrecy” set me thinking about the principle of open justice in the context of closed tribunals, and this post is a first attempt at applying the principle in that context. In that respect, I very much welcome discussion of my analysis in the comments.

The starting point is section 19(4A) of the Refugee Act, 1996 (also here) as inserted by section 7 of the Immigration Act, 2003 (also here), which provides:

(a) The chairperson of the Tribunal may, at his or her discretion, decide not to publish (other than to the persons referred to in section 16(17) [of the 1996 Act, also here]) a decision of the Tribunal which in his or her opinion is not of legal importance.

…

Reform of Contract Law

13 April, 20127 November, 2012

| No Comments

| Contract

Not only is the Scottish Law Commission (SLC) undertaking a comprehensive review of Scots Contract Law in light of the Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR) of Principles, Definitions and Model Rules of European Private Law, but the Australian Attorney-General, Nicola Roxon, has just released a discussion paper to explore the scope for reforming Australian Contract Law.

The most recent discussion paper produced by the SLC discusses contract formation for the electronic age (DP 154, March 2012, pdf). It follows an earlier discussion paper with interpretation of contract (DP 147, Feb 2011, pdf), and a joint project (pdf) with the Law Commission of England and Wales on the proposed Common European Sales Law. Moreover, the SLC intend to publish further discussion papers, including one in the near future on remedies for breach of contract. Chapter 9 of the contract formation discussion paper contains 51 questions, and the Appendix contains some draft statutory provisions, drawn from various European texts.

The Australian review is equally as ambitious. The discussion paper (doc | pdf) aims to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of commercial and consumer transactions; and it therefore considers whether Australian contact law could be reformed to:

enhance accessibility, certainty and simplicity
set standards of conduct
better support innovation and participation in the digital economy
better meet the evolving needs of businesses particularly small and medium businesses
make the law more elastic to promote long-term relationships, and
harmonise and internationalise contract law.

…

Offence and confusion – updated

12 April, 201224 April, 2012

| 2 Comments

| advertising, Freedom of Expression

Adverts by the Core Issues campaign group, centred around the slogan above, suggesting that gay people could be cured, have been banned from London buses by Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, and chair of Transport for London.

On the other hand, the British Humanist Association ran an advertising campaign on London buses several years ago. Their slogan said “There’s probably no god. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life”. More recently, Stonewall ran a campaign around the slogan “Some people are gay. Get over it!”.

Both the BHA campaign and the Core Issues campaign were controversial, ~~and cleared by the Advertising Standards Authority~~ update: notwithstanding earlier reports, it seems that the ASA did not adjudicate on the Core Issues campaign. But the opposition to the latter has been much greater, resulting in the Mayor’s decision to ban the adverts. I am very confused about this, as I can see no material difference between the three campaigns. All three are insulting or offensive to significant groups of the population, and all three should be assessed on the same standard. They should all be published, or all banned. For my own part, I think that the above slogan is horribly offensive, but I don’t think that offense is a sufficient standard to ban it or any of the other adverts.…

Defamation and internet publication in the Irish Supreme Court

12 April, 20124 March, 2013

| 1 Comment

| Cyberlaw, Defamation

In Coleman v MGN Limited [2012] IESC 20 (15 March 2012) (here and here), Denham J held:

10. The claim is now one of internet publication based on the jurisprudence in the linked cases of eDate Advertising GmbH v. X (C 509/09) and Martinez v. Société MGN Limited (C 161/10) referred to as Martinez. It was submitted that the Daily Mirror is on line every day. Counsel admitted that there was no evidence of such publication or of a person accessing such a site. His submission related to an additional site, and not to UKPressOnline which is an archival site, and which formed the substantial subject of the additional affidavit. Counsel submitted that the Daily Mirror being on line it is presumed that there would be hits on the site. Thus, the case hinges on the issue of publication on the internet. …

12. The case is now one where it is the plaintiff’s case that the defamation was published on the internet. Specifically he referred to the Daily Mirror on line. There was also reference to UKPressOnline, which is an archival website, to which institutions, such as academics, have access if they subscribe, but there is no general access other than to a thumbnail miniature of part of the article and photograph.

…