Studies in Law and Justice

Analysis of Breen v Williams: A Critical Examination of the Doctor-Patient Fiduciary Relationship

2025-10-17T10:06:35+00:00

This paper critically examines Breen v Williams, where the High Court of Australia rejected the view that doctors owe fiduciary duties to grant patients access to medical records. By restricting fiduciary obligations to negative duties, the Court overlooked patient vulnerability, trust, and the therapeutic realities of healthcare. Drawing on Canadian jurisprudence, particularly McInerney v MacDonald, the paper highlights the divergence from international approaches that affirm positive disclosure duties. It argues for a reformed fiduciary framework aligned with patient autonomy, while noting that legislative reforms, such as the Health Records and Information Privacy Act 2002 (NSW), have partially addressed these gaps.

The “Intertwined” Relationship and Deadlock Between Delimitation of the Continental Shelf Beyond 200 nm and the Delineation of Its Outer Limits

2025-10-17T10:09:38+00:00

This article examines the legal relationship and practical challenges between “delimitation” and “delineation” within the framework of the United Nations Convention on the law of the sea. Through an analysis of rulings by the ITLOS and the contrasting stance adopted by the ICJ, it points out that international judicial bodies have yet to clarify the relationship between the two. Although Articles 76(10) and 83(1) of the UNCLOS treat the two as independent processes in form, in practice they are deeply intertwined due to overlapping entitlements, geographical foundations, and procedural interactions. To break the deadlock—where coastal States are trapped in a cycle of being unable to achieve successful delimitation without first delineating outer limits, a situation exacerbated by Paragraph 5(a) of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf—this article assesses the interim solution proposed by scholars, and ultimately proposes a fundamental solution: reforming Paragraph 5(a) by recommending that the CLCS be empowered to conduct preliminary technical considerations of all submissions.

Research on the Soft Law Incentive Mechanism for Coordinated Regional Economic Development

2025-10-20T01:42:02+00:00

Against the backdrop of the in-depth advancement of the regional economic coordinated development strategy and the construction of a unified national market, the traditional hard law governance model is difficult to adapt to the complexity and dynamics of cross-regional cooperation due to its rigid constraints. The soft law incentive mechanism, with its characteristics of flexible constraints and consultative governance, has become an important supplement. Based on institutional economics, soft law governance theory and regional rule of law theory, this article systematically analyzes the theoretical basis and functional value of soft law in reducing transaction costs, promoting consultative co-governance and facilitating the synergy of soft and hard laws. Based on China’s practice, it is found that soft law faces practical difficulties in regional economic coordination, such as lagging institutional supply, imbalance in the coordination between soft and hard laws, insufficient coverage of norms, and weak implementation efficiency. The research proposes to promote the transformation of the soft law incentive mechanism in regional economic governance from “form innovation” to “efficiency improvement” through paths such as establishing a predictive formulation mechanism, strengthening the transformation of soft and hard laws, and improving the full-cycle management, providing institutional support for deepening regional coordinated development.

Does International Humanitarian Law Adequately Address Gender Issues?

2025-10-20T02:03:13+00:00

With the increasing complexity of armed conflict situations around the world, how to solve the gender issue in conflict situations has gradually become a topic of concern for the international community. International humanitarian law (IHL), as a legal framework designed to provide humanitarian protection for people in armed conflict, is of great significance in regulating wrongful acts in armed conflict and reducing the adverse effects caused by armed conflict, which of course also includes dealing with gender issues that commonly occur in conflict situations. This essay aims to study the significance and problems of gender provisions in IHL, and how different cultural, legal and political factors affect the implementation of gender provisions in IHL, especially the difficulties in the accountability and punishment of sexual violence, from the perspective of the development of gender regulations under the framework of IHL. This paper mainly adopts a qualitative analysis method and supplemented with appropriate quantitative data. Through case studies of specific conflict countries, comparative analysis and analysis of key legal texts under the framework of IHL, this essay expounds the current achievements and shortcomings of IHL in addressing gender issues in armed conflict. The significance of this study is that it hopes to further understand the IHL framework from a gender perspective and put forward relevant suggestions to promote the appropriateness and effectiveness of IHL as an important humanitarian gender protection legal system.

Federal Challenges in Implementing International Obligations

2025-10-30T01:43:28+00:00

This paper analyzes the structural challenges federal governments face in implementing international treaty obligations by comparing two landmark cases: Commonwealth v Tasmania (1983) from the Australian High Court and Vishakha v State of Rajasthan (1997) from the Indian Supreme Court. Both cases reveal contradictions in power distribution within federal systems, but with different root causes: the Tasmanian Dam Case reflects jurisdictional conflicts between federal and state governments, while Vishakha exposes legislative inertia. Through judicial intervention, the two cases were resolved respectively by expanding federal powers and enacting judicial guidelines. The paper argues that while federalism creates coordination inefficiencies and implementation delays, these challenges can be overcome through improved constitutional frameworks, enhanced coordination mechanisms, and timely legislative action.