"High Court Judges Make Law to Keep The Law Up To Date".
They play an integral role in the judicial process, as they apply the law and in some cases create the law. While doing this they must take consideration of current political, social, moral and economic considerations and adhere to a certain consensus of society. The role of the judge is taken for granted by many people who view their role as an administrative one. Judges, especially those of the Supreme and High Courts are under extreme pressure and do not just decide cases in a machine like fashion- by reading and administering precedents. What is it that Judges do when they decide cases: A judge makes binding decisions affecting the rights and duties of people and institutions. In carrying out these duties, the judge can use three main sources of Australian law. These are; Acts of Parliament or legislation, the common law and precedents, and the constitution. Judges have these tools to work with, and they decide cases based on their interpretations of them. Faced with a case, a judge seeks the relevant legislation and statutes, looks upon the constitution if required and seeks precedent in order to maintain the law as it stands.
This essay will discuss about anti-privacy laws concerning the sudden technological advancements of the twentieth century and the effects it has caused on society and the judicial system.
The primary statute of the anti-privacy act is the privacy act. 1988 The original version applied to the Commonwealth public sector. It was amended in 1990 to apply also to the credit reporting industry. It was then further amended in 2000 to apply to much of the private sector. The original statute was adequate, the 1990 credit reporting amendment reasonably strong, and the 2000 private sector amendment so bad that some people think it is merely the world's worst privacy legislation whereas other people regard it as anti-privacy legislation.