ARDC Research Link Australia Research Link Australia   BETA Research
Link
Australia
  • ARDC Newsletter Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • About
  • Feedback
  • Explore Collaborations
  • Researcher
  • Funded Activity
  • Organisation
  • Researcher
  • Funded Activity
  • Organisation
  • Researcher
  • Funded Activity
  • Organisation

Need help searching? View our Search Guide.

Advanced Search

Current Selection
Socio-Economic Objective : Understanding legal processes
Field of Research : Evidence And Procedure
Clear All
Filter by Field of Research
Evidence And Procedure (8)
Law (3)
Criminology (2)
Detection And Prevention Of Crime; Security Services (2)
Sociology And Social Studies Of Science And Technology (2)
Adjudication (1)
Applied Economics (1)
Applied Economics Not Elsewhere Classified (1)
Comparative Law (1)
Criminal Law (1)
Historical Studies (1)
History: Australian (1)
Indigenous Law (1)
Justice Systems And Administration (1)
Legal Practice (1)
Police Administration, Procedures And Practice (1)
Psychological Methodology, Design And Analysis (1)
Sociology (1)
Filter by Socio-Economic Objective
Understanding legal processes (8)
Law enforcement (4)
Justice and the law not elsewhere classified (3)
Civics and citizenship (2)
Communication Not Elsewhere Classified (1)
Microeconomic issues not elsewhere classified (1)
Ownership of the land (1)
Understanding Australia'S Past (1)
Filter by Funding Provider
Australian Research Council (8)
Filter by Status
Closed (8)
Filter by Scheme
Discovery Projects (6)
ARC Future Fellowships (1)
Linkage Projects (1)
Filter by Country
Australia (8)
Filter by Australian State/Territory
VIC (4)
ACT (2)
NSW (2)
QLD (1)
  • Researchers (4)
  • Funded Activities (8)
  • Organisations (4)
  • Funded Activity

    Discovery Projects - Grant ID: DP0771770

    Funder
    Australian Research Council
    Funding Amount
    $105,000.00
    Summary
    Just truth? An empirical study of expert evidence. Though a ubiquitous feature of contemporary legal and regulatory practice, expert evidence continues to create administrative and socio-economic problems. Expert evidence can add to the length, cost and complexity of litigation and has been linked to the failure of tort law, the withdrawal of insurance coverage, legal mistakes and notorious miscarriages of justice. This project will examine how expert knowledge is developed and used in and aroun .... Just truth? An empirical study of expert evidence. Though a ubiquitous feature of contemporary legal and regulatory practice, expert evidence continues to create administrative and socio-economic problems. Expert evidence can add to the length, cost and complexity of litigation and has been linked to the failure of tort law, the withdrawal of insurance coverage, legal mistakes and notorious miscarriages of justice. This project will examine how expert knowledge is developed and used in and around legal settings. It will identify means of improving the provision and evaluation of expert advice in order to enhance the social legitimacy of our legal institutions and facilitate commercial innovation and productivity.
    Read more Read less
    More information
    Funded Activity

    ARC Future Fellowships - Grant ID: FT0992041

    Funder
    Australian Research Council
    Funding Amount
    $761,980.00
    Summary
    Suspect sciences: Enhancing emerging identification technologies and forensic expertise. This project will enhance national security and the safety of Australians. It represents an innovative response to uncertainties associated with the use of identification technologies in national security operations, policing and criminal prosecutions. The project will provide those developing and using identification technologies and evidence with a much clearer indication of their capabilities and limitati .... Suspect sciences: Enhancing emerging identification technologies and forensic expertise. This project will enhance national security and the safety of Australians. It represents an innovative response to uncertainties associated with the use of identification technologies in national security operations, policing and criminal prosecutions. The project will provide those developing and using identification technologies and evidence with a much clearer indication of their capabilities and limitations. It will help to prevent exaggerated interpretations and will reduce the incidence of mistaken identifications. It will encourage more efficient use of surveillance infrastructures and prevent citizens from being 'identified', accused and wrongfully convicted on the basis of unreliable or error prone techniques and opinions.
    Read more Read less
    More information
    Funded Activity

    Linkage Projects - Grant ID: LP0990833

    Funder
    Australian Research Council
    Funding Amount
    $142,000.00
    Summary
    Australian Jurors' Perspectives on Expert Evidence. This inter-state, industry and research collaborative project will shed light on how courts, lawyers and experts can best work together to assist juries in their decision-making task. With the cost of a criminal jury trial running well in excess of $20,000 per day, policy-makers are keen to find ways of improving the efficiency of criminal trials. Improving the performance of the jury system will benefit the Australian community by enhancing th .... Australian Jurors' Perspectives on Expert Evidence. This inter-state, industry and research collaborative project will shed light on how courts, lawyers and experts can best work together to assist juries in their decision-making task. With the cost of a criminal jury trial running well in excess of $20,000 per day, policy-makers are keen to find ways of improving the efficiency of criminal trials. Improving the performance of the jury system will benefit the Australian community by enhancing the quality and reducing the cost of the criminal justice system. By intimately involving the judges and forensic scientists in this project we maximise the potential for the results of our research to be adopted by those in a position to improve the jury system.
    Read more Read less
    More information
    Funded Activity

    Discovery Projects - Grant ID: DP0208350

    Funder
    Australian Research Council
    Funding Amount
    $188,240.00
    Summary
    HISTORICAL EXPERTS AND INDIGENOUS LITIGANTS: the role of Historical Expert Evidence in Federal Court Cases. Since Mabo, historians are increasingly being called as expert witnesses in cases involving indigenous litigants. Historians perceive serious difficulties in the Court's treatment of qualitative, historical material, resulting in a possible denial of access to justice. The project investigates this treatment, pursuing issues such as expert evidence generally, the specific relationship betw .... HISTORICAL EXPERTS AND INDIGENOUS LITIGANTS: the role of Historical Expert Evidence in Federal Court Cases. Since Mabo, historians are increasingly being called as expert witnesses in cases involving indigenous litigants. Historians perceive serious difficulties in the Court's treatment of qualitative, historical material, resulting in a possible denial of access to justice. The project investigates this treatment, pursuing issues such as expert evidence generally, the specific relationship between Law and History, and the particularity of cases involving indigenous claims. The investigation asks whether historians as expert witnesses can retain both their historical professionalism and adapt to the requirements of the courts, or whether the courts? rules of evidence themselves require adaptation.
    Read more Read less
    More information
    Funded Activity

    Discovery Projects - Grant ID: DP0988956

    Funder
    Australian Research Council
    Funding Amount
    $356,000.00
    Summary
    A Comparative Law and Economics Analysis of Class Actions in Australia, the US and the UK. Research on how class action law suits operate to enforce rules and rights in the civil justice system, can promote three of the four national research priorities. By enabling better enforcement of competition, contract and corporations law for consumers and investors encourages better performing markets, corporations, and in turn an innovation culture and economy. By enabling better enforcement of produ .... A Comparative Law and Economics Analysis of Class Actions in Australia, the US and the UK. Research on how class action law suits operate to enforce rules and rights in the civil justice system, can promote three of the four national research priorities. By enabling better enforcement of competition, contract and corporations law for consumers and investors encourages better performing markets, corporations, and in turn an innovation culture and economy. By enabling better enforcement of product safety laws (e.g. asbestos and tobacco) it will promote better products and services and thus better health of users over time. Finally by enabling better enforcement of environmental law it will help address the water crisis and climate change.
    Read more Read less
    More information
    Funded Activity

    Discovery Projects - Grant ID: DP1093372

    Funder
    Australian Research Council
    Funding Amount
    $281,000.00
    Summary
    Drugs, law and criminal procedure in Southeast Asia: A comparative analysis. Australians accused of major drugs offences in Southeast Asia face very serious penalties, including death or life imprisonment. There is, however, a lack of accurate information in Australia regarding how drugs trials are conducted in the region, let alone detailed knowledge of applicable laws and procedure. There is now an acute need for detailed comparative material on criminal laws and judicial processes in Indonesi .... Drugs, law and criminal procedure in Southeast Asia: A comparative analysis. Australians accused of major drugs offences in Southeast Asia face very serious penalties, including death or life imprisonment. There is, however, a lack of accurate information in Australia regarding how drugs trials are conducted in the region, let alone detailed knowledge of applicable laws and procedure. There is now an acute need for detailed comparative material on criminal laws and judicial processes in Indonesia, Vietnam and Singapore, so better support can be provided both for Australians facing drug-related charges and for Australian governments in developing policies and strategies in response to the issues these trials create.
    Read more Read less
    More information
    Funded Activity

    Discovery Projects - Grant ID: DP0449960

    Funder
    Australian Research Council
    Funding Amount
    $94,000.00
    Summary
    Developing a Regulatory Framework for Mass DNA Screenings: A comparative study of public requests by crime investigators for bodily samples. The aim of the proposed study is to devise a principled model for regulating the performance of mass DNA screenings by Australian police. A ?mass DNA screening? is a public appeal by criminal investigators for bodily samples in order to test whether donors can be linked to a particular unsolved crime. Recent law reform inquires have recognised that the var .... Developing a Regulatory Framework for Mass DNA Screenings: A comparative study of public requests by crime investigators for bodily samples. The aim of the proposed study is to devise a principled model for regulating the performance of mass DNA screenings by Australian police. A ?mass DNA screening? is a public appeal by criminal investigators for bodily samples in order to test whether donors can be linked to a particular unsolved crime. Recent law reform inquires have recognised that the various legal regimes governing mass DNA screenings are inadequate in many respects. The study will develop a new regulatory framework suitable for implementation in all Australian jurisdictions through a principled consideration of laws and recent practice in Australian and comparative jurisdictions.
    Read more Read less
    More information
    Funded Activity

    Discovery Projects - Grant ID: DP0984648

    Funder
    Australian Research Council
    Funding Amount
    $236,000.00
    Summary
    Evaluating Federal class actions through empirical and comparative perspectives. Sixteen years after the introduction of a Federal class action regime (Part IVA), it is time for an accurate assessment (through an empirical and comparative study) of whether the concerns expressed by numerous commentators - that Part IVA has failed to enhance access to justice and judicial economy and has frequently been abused by the legal representatives of Part IVA parties and litigation funders - are justified .... Evaluating Federal class actions through empirical and comparative perspectives. Sixteen years after the introduction of a Federal class action regime (Part IVA), it is time for an accurate assessment (through an empirical and comparative study) of whether the concerns expressed by numerous commentators - that Part IVA has failed to enhance access to justice and judicial economy and has frequently been abused by the legal representatives of Part IVA parties and litigation funders - are justified. This study will finally provide Australian lawmakers with a detailed reform agenda to ensure that Part IVA will provide the benefits that it was intended to secure whilst operating in a fair and just manner. It will thus benefit similarly situated claimants, respondents, the Federal Court and the broader community.
    Read more Read less
    More information

    Showing 1-8 of 8 Funded Activites

    Advanced Search

    Advanced search on the Researcher index.

    Advanced search on the Funded Activity index.

    Advanced search on the Organisation index.

    National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy

    The Australian Research Data Commons is enabled by NCRIS.

    ARDC CONNECT NEWSLETTER

    Subscribe to the ARDC Connect Newsletter to keep up-to-date with the latest digital research news, events, resources, career opportunities and more.

    Subscribe

    Quick Links

    • Home
    • About Research Link Australia
    • Product Roadmap
    • Documentation
    • Disclaimer
    • Contact ARDC

    We acknowledge and celebrate the First Australians on whose traditional lands we live and work, and we pay our respects to Elders past, present and emerging.

    Copyright © ARDC. ACN 633 798 857 Terms and Conditions Privacy Policy Accessibility Statement
    Top
    Quick Feedback