About Us

We work collaboratively with our clients to build strong, sustainable relationships. Our team is committed to delivering consistent high standards of service, and we understand the importance of accessibility. Working with us, you'll enjoy open communication, meaning well scoped, properly resourced and effectively managed matters.

Learn More

Latest Case

Advising on complex water infrastructure projects for local government September 12, 2018

Parkes Shire Council made the decision to replace its 80-year-old water treatment facility as it was nearing its capacity to properly service residents. The Parkes Integrated Water Infrastructure Renewal Program saw the replacement of the … Continued

Latest News

Maddocks advises French firm on major construction company acquisition August 6, 2018

Monday 6 August 2018 Law firm Maddocks recently advised French firm Bouygues Construction on its acquisition of leading Australian construction and fitout business AW Edwards. The acquisition is a key part of Bouygues’ continued expansion … Continued

Latest Article

New Federal Court decision calls into question relevance of internal legal advice to AAT reviews September 18, 2018

On 3 August 2018, Justice Bromwich of the Federal Court handed down his decision in Commissioner of Taxation v ACN 154 520 199 Pty Ltd (in liq) (formerly EBS & Associates Pty Ltd) [2018] FCA … Continued

Academic freedom and the price of silence: university professor in hot water over climate change comments

Peter Ridd, Professor of Physics at James Cook University, has brought proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court against the University, challenging a ‘Final Censure’ recently issued to him.

Professor Ridd received the censure following a series of public comments questioning the quality and integrity of the science behind significant government expenditure decisions. Professor Ridd expressed concern, both on Sky News and in an interview with The Australian, about what he considers to be an erroneous decision by the Australian Government to spend more than $1 billion on the Great Barrier Reef in the next few years, in an attempt to mitigate the effects of climate change on the reef.

The University claimed that Professor Ridd’s comments denigrated the University’s reputation and directed Professor Ridd to cease making similar comments in the future. The University’s decision to issue the censure was apparently made on the basis that his comments were not made in a ‘collegial’ manner.

Professor Ridd has brought proceedings against the University, asserting that his decision to do so was driven by his ‘instinct for truth and honesty’ and his right to academic freedom.

This case demonstrates the inherent tension between an academic’s right to academic freedom, and freedom of speech more broadly as Professor Ridd asserts, and a university’s requirement that academics, and other employees, not bring the institution’s reputation into disrepute.

Professor Ridd is being supported in his legal fight by the Institute of Public Affairs and raised almost $100,000 through a gofundme drive to challenge the Final Censure imposed on him. With this, the stage is set for a significant stoush.

What are your views on this issue? Has James Cook University gone too far? Was the Final Censure reasonable? Or does academic freedom prevail?

We look forward to your comments and will keep you updated as the case progresses.

Authors:   
Michael Nicolazzo
Senior Associate
61 3 9258 3306
michael.nicolazzo@maddocks.com.au
Claire Francis
Lawyer
61 3 9258 3568
claire.francis@maddocks.com.au

 

Peter Ridd, Professor of Physics at James Cook University, has brought proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court against the University, challenging a ‘Final Censure’ recently issued to him.

Professor Ridd received the censure following a series of public comments questioning the quality and integrity of the science behind significant government expenditure decisions. Professor Ridd expressed concern, both on Sky News and in an interview with The Australian, about what he considers to be an erroneous decision by the Australian Government to spend more than $1 billion on the Great Barrier Reef in the next few years, in an attempt to mitigate the effects of climate change on the reef.

The University claimed that Professor Ridd’s comments denigrated the University’s reputation and directed Professor Ridd to cease making similar comments in the future. The University’s decision to issue the censure was apparently made on the basis that his comments were not made in a ‘collegial’ manner.

Professor Ridd has brought proceedings against the University, asserting that his decision to do so was driven by his ‘instinct for truth and honesty’ and his right to academic freedom.

This case demonstrates the inherent tension between an academic’s right to academic freedom, and freedom of speech more broadly as Professor Ridd asserts, and a university’s requirement that academics, and other employees, not bring the institution’s reputation into disrepute.

Professor Ridd is being supported in his legal fight by the Institute of Public Affairs and raised almost $100,000 through a gofundme drive to challenge the Final Censure imposed on him. With this, the stage is set for a significant stoush.

What are your views on this issue? Has James Cook University gone too far? Was the Final Censure reasonable? Or does academic freedom prevail?

We look forward to your comments and will keep you updated as the case progresses.

Authors:   
Michael Nicolazzo
Senior Associate
61 3 9258 3306
michael.nicolazzo@maddocks.com.au
Claire Francis
Lawyer
61 3 9258 3568
claire.francis@maddocks.com.au