Comments
Abstract
In a just published issue in one of Australia’s oldest and best-known law reviews, the Federal Law Review, Dr Harry Hobbs of the University of Technology Sydney has written an article that comes out swinging (read on to see that that is, if anything, a mild description) against critics of three High Court of Australia cases. The three judgments are separated by 28 years in total, but Hobbs lumps them — or rather various critics of any one of these three decisions — together as part of a supposedly coherent and like-minded whole. I am one of those thus lumped, which is why I am taking the time to offer up this brief reply, though there are dozens of others also so categorised.