Professor Tania Sourdin
President of Academic Senate
President Academic Senate's Office
- Email:tania.sourdin@newcastle.edu.au
- Phone:(02) 492 15119
Transparency, technology and teaching: an eye for justice
Professor Tania Sourdin’s career has spanned the globe as a consultant and specialist expert in a range of complex programs across the justice sector.
With an extensive career focusing on justice, litigation, conflict avoidance and dispute resolution, Tania has influenced legislative reform initiatives, standards and cultural change for dispute resolution. She has also taught judges in a range of programs that include court craft, civil procedure, decision making, complex behaviour and in judicial orientation programs.
Having written extensively about justice issues, Tania’s work on boards, committees and working groups continues to expand across the country and internationally.
As Dean and Head of School at the University of Newcastle Law School this work has continued and having the opportunity to lead a number of justice innovation project teams has resulted in research outcomes that have had significant impacts. “It’s been a very broad and interesting part of my life” Tania says.
From empiricism to innovation
“I started off as a lawyer before becoming more of an empirical researcher looking at what happens in the justice system. I’d describe the justice system quite broadly in that it includes complaints through to formal court adjudication,” Tania explains.
“A lot of the work I’ve done in the past has been around looking at how people experience court and justice processes: how long they take, how much they cost and how those processes can be improved.”
The University of Newcastle Law School is unique in its size and scope, because it’s such a practical law school with a unique hands-on clinical program. This hands-on approach allows students at UON have the opportunity to work with clients under the supervision of legal practitioners at the University of Newcastle Legal Centre and provide a range of outreach clinics such as the highly successful Law On The Beach program. In addition, the innovative program and curriculum mean that project based work with students can build upon academic work so that research work can be applied to real world problems.
Technology and the practice of law
Tania’s research focus is intense, with a current slant on exploring innovations within the judicial system. “I’m exploring how well they work, whether they can be replicated what prevents them being replicated and how they can be extended in certain circumstances?” Tania explains.
The range of technologies that are currently being utilised in the judicial system posit some novel questions that Tania’s keen to explore. “These technologies raise an interesting point about how much humans actually need to be involved in the delivery of justice in the longer term. The question around how humans remain involved, and how much humans add in the justice sector is intriguing,” Tania says.
There are three levels of broad levels of change: supportive technology, replacement technology and disruptive technology, and each offers differing levels of support and change.
Tania suggests that it’s inevitable that smaller cases will progress through more technologically-aided processes into the future, which is a good thing. “It can be easier for people to access information and to access systems without having to actually arrive at the court or to be doing things between the hours of 9 to 5 which is often expected in the justice sector,” Tania says.
In the criminal sphere Tania explains that there could be some cost savings through technology, particularly in preparation for a trial. “There are many areas of innovations that can lead to cost-savings. It’s been used a great deal in the US although there are ongoing issues with algorithmic injustice. However many technological tools can enable people to work more cost-effectively. Doing this online is much easier than having people sitting in a room sorting through materials.”
Social media, transparency and the law
Legal and court-reporting has taken on a new slant with the uptake of social media sites by news organisations. Rather than having to wait until the following day to read a court report in the paper, the commentary is immediate, is reported from the court and is online in seconds. This uptake of social media and the immediacy of reportage online is something that raises conflicting views in Tania. “It often takes a long time for a complex matter to be sorted out and sometimes the commentary that arises is not very sophisticated or informed, and can sometimes be misleading as it’s only based on a short interaction.”
“However, I do think that it’s good that there is transparency around the justice system. It is intended to be open and accessible, but most people don’t want to go and sit in a courtroom when a case that they’re interested in is being dealt with. So having faster online, on-time reporting makes it easier for people to understand what’s going on in the justice system – which I think is a very good thing. There are however some significant questions about how open video conferencing processes are and this has been very relevant in the COVID-19 era”
Tania utilises social media in a professional capacity to expand her contacts and share new developments in the judicial scene. “For me, it’s a good learning experience and a way to better understand what’s going on in the justice sector more broadly. Otherwise I think there’s mainly a temptation to talk to other academics and senior professionals. With LinkedIn you talk with people in all parts of the justice system, so I think that’s very useful,” Tania adds.
“With Twitter it’s a different interaction: it’s so fast I can do it very quickly. I like the immediacy of Twitter too. I was recently writing an article on ‘priming’ in justice and as I was writing it there was an article that led me to another that helped me extend my thinking in a way that wouldn’t have happened if I hadn’t been accessing Twitter,” Tania says.
Although Tania is now based in Newcastle, her research continues to spread its wings across the country and continents. “I’ve got projects happening in other States of Australia as well as overseas, along with judicial education work. I have a really interesting international project that is focussed on judges views of technology. There’s also an interesting project that I’ve collaborated on with the Business areas on complaints and the return on investment on good complaints management and which involves looking at the complaints processes in big organisations and government and thinking about how complaints data can improve products and services as well as the customer experience.”
“I’m also writing about the ‘Judge vs Robot’ which is fascinating and I am pleased to have written a book in this area. I also run an international collaborative network under the Law and Society Association which has around 80 lawyers and judges in it, and we look at judging – and that’s a particular area I’m fascinated in. In particular, I’m intrigued by the moral and ethical dilemmas – what happens when people start to consider artificial intelligence in different ways as well?”
Could robots replacing judges remove subjectivity?
“When you have more sophisticated algorithms that consider the legislation you may remove some of the subjectivity. However, that does come at a cost as judges also have a role as commentators and also test a lot of realities within our society. The interesting thing about artificial intelligence is that it’s often seen as apart from humans as you have a computer doing it whereas what we know is that, increasingly into the future, humans will be enhanced with artificial intelligence. I think this is really interesting piece as well and one that’s worthy of exploring.”
With a keen focus on the University of Newcastle Law School and a continued dedication to research Tania continues to explore the way that justice shapes public policy and its impact on society. It’s an exciting area in the field of justice, and one that Tania is keen to pursue.
Transparency, technology and teaching: an eye for justice
Professor Sourdin has published and presented widely on a range of topics.
Career Summary
Biography
Professor Tania Sourdin is the Dean of the University of Newcastle Law School. She was previously the Foundation Chair and Director of the Australian Centre for Justice Innovation (ACJI) at Monash University in Australia. Professor Sourdin has led national research projects and produced important recommendations for justice reform. In the past two decades, she has conducted qualitative and quantitative research projects into aspects of the justice system systems in 11 Courts and Tribunals and five external dispute resolution schemes. Other research has focussed on justice innovation, technology, delay and systemic reforms.
Professor Sourdin is the author of books, articles and papers, and has published and presented widely on a range of topics including justice issues, mediation, conflict resolution, collaborative law, artificial intelligence, technology and organisational change. She is also a Visiting Professor at the University of Sydney and has worked as a senior Tribunal member in respect of appellate matters and as a mediator for more than 25 years. She has worked extensively overseas as an expert consultant in relation to disputes and dispute system design. In 2014 she was appointed as the National Broadband Network (NBN) Industry Dispute Adviser in Australia and also co chaired the 2014 National Mediation Conference. In 2015 she won the Deans award for Research Impact in relation to her work on behavioural change in the justice sector.
Qualifications
- Doctor of Philosophy, University of Technology Sydney
- Bachelor of Arts/Bachelor of Laws, University of New South Wales
- Master of Laws, University of Technology Sydney
Keywords
- Complaints Handling
- Dispute Resolution
- Judges
- Justice
- Justice Innovation
- Mediation
- Technology
Fields of Research
Code | Description | Percentage |
---|---|---|
480408 | Law, science and technology | 40 |
480506 | Litigation, adjudication and dispute resolution | 40 |
480501 | Access to justice | 20 |
Professional Experience
UON Appointment
Title | Organisation / Department |
---|---|
Professor | University of Newcastle Newcastle Law School Australia |
Publications
For publications that are currently unpublished or in-press, details are shown in italics.
Book (16 outputs)
Year | Citation | Altmetrics | Link | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2024 |
Legal Aspects of Autonomous Systems, Springer International Publishing (2024)
|
|||||||
2023 |
Rogers N, Maloney M, The Anthropocene Judgments Project, Routledge
|
|||||||
2021 |
Sourdin T, Judges, Technology and Artificial Intelligence The Artificial Judge, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, 320 (2021) [A1]
|
Nova | ||||||
2020 |
Sourdin T, Meredith J, Li B, Digital Technology and Justice Justice Apps, Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon, 110 (2020) [A1]
|
Nova | ||||||
2020 | Sourdin T, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Thomson Reuters Australia, Pyrmont, 935 (2020) [A1] | Nova | ||||||
2008 | Sourdin T, Alternative Dispute Resolution, 490 (2008) | |||||||
Show 13 more books |
Chapter (32 outputs)
Year | Citation | Altmetrics | Link | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2024 |
Sourdin T, 'Regulating Judge Artificial Intelligence', Legal Aspects of Autonomous Systems: A Comparative Approach, Springer, UK 243-264 (2024) [B1]
|
Nova | |||
2024 |
Sourdin T, ChatGPT, 'How will 2050 forms of artificial intelligence (AI) judge the anthropocene?', The Anthropocene Judgments Project: Futureproofing the Common Law, Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon 243-258 (2024) [B1]
|
Nova | |||
2024 |
Sourdin T, ChatGPT, 'How will 2050 forms of artificial intelligence (AI) judge the anthropocene?', The Anthropocene Judgments Project: Futureproofing the Common Law, Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon 243-258 (2024) [B1]
|
||||
2018 |
Sourdin TM, Cornes R, 'Do Judges Need to be human? The implications of Technology for Responsive Judging', The Responsive Judge, Springer, Singapore 87-119 (2018) [B1]
|
Nova | |||
2018 | Sourdin TM, Zariski A, 'What is Responsive Judging?', The Responsive Judge, Springer, Singapore 1-38 (2018) [B1] | Nova | |||
2018 |
Sourdin TM, Cornes R, 'Do Judges Need to be human? The implications of Technology for Responsive Judging', The Responsive Judge, Springer, Singapore 87-119 (2018) [B1]
|
Nova | |||
2016 | Sourdin T, 'A Broader View of Justice?', Resolving Civil Disputes, LexisNexis Australia, Chatswood, NSW 19-36 (2016) [B1] | Nova | |||
2015 | Sourdin TM, 'When to step away and when to step up', So You Want to Be a Leader, Hybrid Publishers, Melbourne 131-145 (2015) [B1] | ||||
2015 | Sourdin TM, 'Reforming civil procedure and alternative dispute resolution', Ten Years of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW): A Decade of Insights and Guide to Future Litigation, Lawbook Co, Pyrmont, N.S.W. 191-208 (2015) [B1] | Nova | |||
2013 | Sourdin TM, 'A broader view of justice?', The Future of Dispute Resolution, LexisNexis/Butterworths, Australia 155-166 (2013) | ||||
2013 |
Sourdin TM, 'Introduction', The multi-tasking judge: Comparative judicial dispute resolution, Thomson Reuters, Australia 1-20 (2013) [B1]
|
||||
2013 | Sourdin TM, 'Facilitative judging: Science sense and sensibility', The multi-tasking judge: Comparative judicial dispute resolution, Thomson Reuters, Pyrmont, N.S.W. 231-247 (2013) [B1] | ||||
2013 | Sourdin TM, Alexander N, 'Developments in ADR', Australian Courts: Serving democracy and its publics, Australian Institute of Judicial Administration, Melbourne 119-147 (2013) [B1] | ||||
2013 | Sourdin TM, Burstyner N, 'Australia's civil justice system: developing a multi-option response', Trends in State Courts 2013: 25th Anniversary Edition, National Center for State Courts, Williamsburg, VA 78-84 (2013) [B1] | ||||
2013 | Sourdin TM, Zariski A, 'Judicial dispute resolution - A global approach', Global Legal issues 2012, Korea Legislation Research Institute, Seoul, Korea 191-206 (2013) | ||||
2011 | Sourdin TM, Liyange C, 'The Promise and reality of online dispute resolution in Australia', Online dispute resolution: Theory and practice: a treatise on technology and dispute resolution, Eleven Publishing, Egypt (2011) [B1] | ||||
2008 | Sourdin TM, 'Sustainable outcomes through effective conflict management', Seeking environmental justice: probing the boundaries, Rodopi Publishing, New York (2008) | ||||
Show 29 more chapters |
Journal article (112 outputs)
Year | Citation | Altmetrics | Link | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2023 |
Sourdin T, Li B, Brown A, 'An Ethical Perspective in the the Judicial Use of Artificial Intelligence: Where Will the New EU Artificial Intelligence Act Take Us?', Australian Law Journal, 97 421-435 (2023) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2023 |
Carlson J, Sourdin T, Armstrong C, Watts M, Carlyle T, 'Return on Investment of Complaint Management: A Review and Research Agenda', AUSTRALASIAN MARKETING JOURNAL, 31 350-360 (2023) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2023 |
Sourdin T, 'Technology and Judges in Australia', Australian Law Journal, 97 636-650 (2023) [C1]
|
||||||||||
2023 |
Sourdin T, 'Robo Justice: Constitutional Issues with Judge AI', Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 30 293-324 (2023) [C1]
|
||||||||||
2022 | Sourdin T, 'Mediating via Zoom', Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 31 280-293 (2022) [C1] | Nova | |||||||||
2022 | Sourdin T, Detterer J, Evans C, 'The Australian work-related expenses regime: fit for purpose or ripe for reform?', Australian Tax Forum: a journal of taxation policy, law and reform, 37 407-454 (2022) [C1] | Nova | |||||||||
2022 | Saady N, Sourdin T, 'Rethinking Lawyer Immunity', Australian Law Journal, 347-367 (2022) [C1] | Nova | |||||||||
2022 |
Schrever C, Hulbert C, Sourdin T, 'Where stress presides: predictors and correlates of stress among Australian judges and magistrates', Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 29 290-322 (2022) [C1] Recent research on the nature, prevalence and severity of judicial stress in Australia has revealed a considerable burden of stress placed upon the judicial system. This article b... [more] Recent research on the nature, prevalence and severity of judicial stress in Australia has revealed a considerable burden of stress placed upon the judicial system. This article builds upon this research by exploring the demographic and workplace factors associated with elevated stress among Australian judicial officers. A survey of 152 judicial officers from 5 Australian courts found that judicial stress¿operationalised as non-specific psychological distress, depressive and anxious symptoms, burnout and secondary traumatic stress¿was predicted by satisfaction of the basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence and relatedness. The only demographic variable found to be reliably associated with judicial stress was jurisdiction: compared with judicial officers in the higher jurisdictions (i.e. judges), those in the summary jurisdictions (i.e. magistrates) reported significantly higher levels of stress and significantly lower levels of basic psychological needs satisfaction. Implications and areas for future research are discussed. Alcohol use and dependence was not associated with levels of stress or needs satisfaction.
|
Nova | |||||||||
2021 |
Sourdin T, Carlson J, Watts M, Armstrong C, Carlyle T, McGeoch D, 'Measuring Effective Complaint Handling by Government', Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 31 210-222 (2021) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2021 |
Heinsch M, Sourdin T, Brosnan C, Cootes H, 'Death sentencing by Zoom: An actor-network theory analysis', Alternative Law Journal, 46 13-19 (2021) [C1] During the COVID-19 pandemic, courts around the world have introduced a range of technologies to cope with social distancing requirements. Jury trials have been largely delayed, a... [more] During the COVID-19 pandemic, courts around the world have introduced a range of technologies to cope with social distancing requirements. Jury trials have been largely delayed, although some jurisdictions moved to remote jury approaches and video conferencing was used extensively for bail applications. While videoconferencing has been used to a more limited extent in the area of sentencing, many were appalled by the news that two people were sentenced to death via Zoom. This article uses actor-network theory (ANT) to explore the role of technology in reshaping the experience of those involved in the sentencing of Punithan Genasan in Singapore.
|
Nova | |||||||||
2021 |
Thiele-Evans L, Pepper B, Zeleznikow J, Foster N, Sourdin T, 'Regulatory approaches to managing artificial intelligence systems in autonomous vehicles in Australia', International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 29 79-100 (2021) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2021 | Sourdin T, Castles M, 'Is the Tail Wagging the Dog? Finding a Place for ADR in Pre-Action Processes', Adelaide Law Review, 41 479-505 (2021) [C1] | Nova | |||||||||
2021 |
Thiele-Evans L, Pepper B, Zeleznikow J, Foster N, Sourdin T, 'Navigating a New Terrain; Developing Autonomous Vehicle Liability Pathways in Australia in light of international experience', Australian Law Journal, 95 875-897 (2021) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2021 |
Shi C, Sourdin T, Li B, 'The Smart Court A New Pathway to Justice in China?', International Journal for Court Administration, 12 1-19 (2021) [C1] As with other jurisdictions, China has introduced a range of newer technologies into its justice sector to promote greater access to justice, improve judicial transparency and to ... [more] As with other jurisdictions, China has introduced a range of newer technologies into its justice sector to promote greater access to justice, improve judicial transparency and to promote just outcomes for disputing parties with legal issues. Chinese courts¿ practice of embracing technology is unique as an overarching approach has been adopted by the central government to build the ¿smart court¿ system across the entirety of its courts. Arguably, the smart court system, which relies on computer technologies that enable big data use, blockchain formation and advisory and determinative forms of artificial legal intelligence, has, to a certain degree, promoted easier access to justice, enabled faster dispute resolution, saved costs by moving judicial process online and ensured that judgments can be enforced. On the other hand, however, there are concerns relating to the use of some technologies that include the use of automated judgments, digital divide issues, judicial independence, as well as issues linked to privacy and data protection. This article concludes that some caution should be exercised in developing the ¿smart court¿ system, primarily in relation to the oversight and introduction of more disruptive technologies to ensure that cheap and quick dispute resolution can be achieved without detrimental impacts on justice.
|
Nova | |||||||||
2020 |
Sourdin T, Castles M, 'Is the tail wagging the dog? Finding a place for adr in pre-action processes: Practice and perception', Adelaide Law Review, 41 479-505 (2020) [C1] Alternative Dispute Resolution (¿ADR¿) processes, particularly mediation, have been integrated into court and tribunal processes in various ways. Civil courts increasingly require... [more] Alternative Dispute Resolution (¿ADR¿) processes, particularly mediation, have been integrated into court and tribunal processes in various ways. Civil courts increasingly require parties to engage in pre-action dispute resolution protocols prior to the issue of proceedings. These initiatives take various forms, and have varying degrees of success. In 2018 the authors undertook an extensive evaluation of the impact of pre-action protocols in the South Australian Supreme and District Courts. This culminated in a report that has subsequently informed reform to the relevant pre-action processes in South Australia in 2020. This article develops a particular aspect of the inquiry: The impact that lawyers may have on the take-up and efficacy of mediation in a pre-action setting. It focusses on a less explored element of the pre-action ADR debate ¿ the possible reasons for reluctance around pre-action engagement within the legal profession. The article concludes that there are a number of influences ¿ systemic, preferential, and professional ¿ relating to the timing, content, and nature of such processes, which have a significant impact on achieving change in this area.
|
Nova | |||||||||
2020 |
Sourdin T, Li B, McNamara DM, 'Court innovations and access to justice in times of crisis', Health Policy and Technology, 9 447-453 (2020) [C1] Background: COVID-19 has disrupted not only the health sector but also justice systems. Courts around the world have had to respond quickly to the challenges presented by the pand... [more] Background: COVID-19 has disrupted not only the health sector but also justice systems. Courts around the world have had to respond quickly to the challenges presented by the pandemic and the associated social distancing restrictions. This has created significant challenges for the justice system and such challenges are likely to be further compounded in the post-pandemic era as there is a ¿tsunami¿ of COVID-19-related disputes predicted. Methods: This study will examine how global court responses have transitioned from being primarily traditional, face-to-face proceedings to online court processes (as supported by internet technology). By adopting a comparative approach, we will analyse how some countries have adapted to this shift to online mode while also maintaining a focus on access to justice. Results: We argue that online modes of dispute resolution, often referred to as Online Dispute Resolution (ODR), can promote resolution while facilitating social distancing in this new COVID-era. The rapid shift from traditional court processes to an online mode has further assisted the public, lawyers and experts to access the justice system in some jurisdictions, even during the crisis. In light of the scale of recent changes, there have been concerns about the capacity of courts to adopt newer technologies as well as issues relating to the impact of a new online model of justice, particularly in terms of the barriers for more vulnerable members of society. Further, the use of disruptive technologies in some courts have posed questions around whether outcomes generated by these innovations reflect the meaning of ¿justice¿ in its traditional sense. Conclusions: This article argues that courts should embrace newer technologies that support court services while being mindful of possible tech-related issues that can impact on justice objectives. We argue that by placing further emphasis on alternative dispute resolution methods and ODR into the future, this might offset the likely tsunami of COVID-related litigation which would enable courts, hospitals, medical professionals and patients to settle disputes in a just, equitable and more efficient manner.
|
Nova | |||||||||
2020 |
Sourdin T, Atherton M, 'Treating Vulnerable Consumers 'Fairly'When They Make a Complaint About Banking or Finance in Australia', Bond Law Review, 32 1-33 (2020) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2020 | Clark B, Sourdin T, 'The Singapore Convention: a solution in search of a problem?', Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 71 481-499 (2020) [C1] | Nova | |||||||||
2020 |
Sourdin T, Li B, Simm S, Connolly A, 'COVID-19, Technology and Family Dispute Resolution', Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 30 270-283 (2020) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2020 |
Sourdin T, Zeleznikow J, 'Courts, Mediation and COVID-19', Australian Business Law Review, 48 138-158 (2020) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2019 |
Sourdin T, Hulbert C, Schrever C, 'The Psychological Impact of Judicial Work: Australia's First Empirical Research Measuring Judicial Stress and Wellbeing', Journal of Judicial Administration, 28 141-168 (2019) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2019 |
Sourdin T, Atherton M, 'Vulnerability and dispute resolution in the banking and finance sector', Social Business, 9 69-91 (2019) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2019 |
Sourdin T, Li B, Burke T, 'Just Quick and Cheap? Civil Dispute Resolution and Technology', Macquarie Law Journal, 19 17-38 (2019) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2019 |
Sourdin T, Murphy R, 'Skilled Mediators and Workplace Bullying', Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 29 146-161 (2019) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2019 |
Sourdin T, 'Judicial Involvement in Settlement Conferences: Opportunities and Issues Tania Sourdin', CIVIL JUSTICE QUARTERLY, 38 78-96 (2019) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2018 | Sourdin TM, Burstyner N, Liyange C, Bahadorreza O, Zeleznikow J, 'Using Technology to Discover More About the Justice System', Rutgers Computer and Technology Law Journal, 44 1-32 (2018) [C1] | Nova | |||||||||
2018 | Sourdin TM, Allen B, 'The Mediating Brain', Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 58-68 (2018) [C1] | Nova | |||||||||
2018 | Sourdin TM, Castles M, Muddle M, 'Pre-Action Requirements in Medical Negligence Matters', Journal of Civil Litigation and Practice, 7 77-93 (2018) [C1] | Nova | |||||||||
2018 |
Sourdin TM, 'Judge v Robot? Artificial Intelligence and Judicial Decision Making', University of New South Wales Law Journal, 41 1114-1133 (2018) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2017 |
Sourdin T, Li B, 'Editorial', Newcastle Law Review, 12 v-ix (2017) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2017 |
Brennan C, Sourdin T, Williams J, Burstyner N, Gill C, 'Consumer vulnerability and complaint handling: Challenges, opportunities and dispute system design', International Journal of Consumer Studies, 41 638-646 (2017) [C1] Effectively designed complaint handling systems play a key role in enabling vulnerable consumers to complain and obtain redress. This article examines current research into consum... [more] Effectively designed complaint handling systems play a key role in enabling vulnerable consumers to complain and obtain redress. This article examines current research into consumer vulnerability, highlighting its multidimensional and expansive nature. Contemporary understandings of consumer vulnerability recognize that the interaction between a wide range of market and consumer characteristics can combine to place any individual at risk of vulnerability. While this broad definition of consumer vulnerability reflects the complex reality of consumers¿ experiences, it poses a key challenge for designers of complaint handling systems: how can they identify and respond to an issue which can potentially affect everyone? Drawing on current research and practice in the United Kingdom and Australia, the article analyses the impact of consumer vulnerability on third party dispute resolution schemes and considers the role these complaint handling organizations can play in supporting their complainants. Third party complaint handling organizations, including a range of Alternative Dispute Resolution services such as ombudsman organizations, can play a key role in increasing access to justice for vulnerable consumer groups and provide specific assistance for individual complainants during the process. It is an opportune time to review whether the needs of consumers at risk of vulnerability are being met within complaint processes and the extent to which third party complaint handlers support those who are most vulnerable to seek redress. Empowering vulnerable consumers to complain presents specific challenges. The article discusses the application of a new model of consumer dispute system design to show how complaint handling organizations can meet the needs of the most vulnerable consumers throughout the process.
|
Nova | |||||||||
2016 |
Sourdin T, Cornes R, 'Implications for therapeutic judging (TJ) of a psychoanalytical approach to the judicial role Reflections on Robert Burt's contribution', International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 48 8-14 (2016) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2016 | Sourdin TM, Hioe A, 'Mediation and Psychological Priming', The Arbitrator and Mediator, 35 76-90 (2016) [C1] | Nova | |||||||||
2016 |
Burstyner N, Sourdin TM, Liyange C, Ofoghi B, 'Why do some civil cases end up in a full hearing? Formulating litigation and process referral indicia through text analysis', Journal of Judicial Administration, 25 257-295 (2016) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2015 | Sourdin TM, 'Dealing with tax disputes about taxation in a 'fair' way', Journal of Australian Taxation, 17 169-223 (2015) [C1] | ||||||||||
2015 | Sourdin TM, 'Evaluating alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in disputes about taxation', The Arbitrator and Mediator, 34 19-32 (2015) [C1] | ||||||||||
2015 | Sourdin TM, 'The role of the courts in the new justice system', Penn State Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation, (2015) | ||||||||||
2014 | Sourdin TM, Russell S, 'Community model cuts crime', Law Institute Journal, 88 28-28 (2014) | ||||||||||
2014 | Sourdin TM, Wallace N, 'The dilemmas posed by self-represented litigants: The dark side', Journal of Judicial Administration, 24 61-70 (2014) [C1] | ||||||||||
2014 | Sourdin TM, 'Using Alternative Dispute Resolution to save time', The Arbitrator and Mediator, 33 61-72 (2014) [C1] | ||||||||||
2014 | Sourdin TM, 'Good faith participation in mediation: An Australian perspective', ACResolution, Spring 31-34 (2014) | ||||||||||
2014 | Sourdin TM, 'International dispatch: ADR trends Down Under', Dispute Resolution Magazine, 20 3-3 (2014) | ||||||||||
2014 | Sourdin TM, 'Why judges should not meet privately with parties in mediation but should be involved in settlement conference work', Journal of Arbitration and Mediation, 4 99-109 (2014) | ||||||||||
2014 | Sourdin TM, 'Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) principles: From negotiation to mediation', Nagoya University Journal of Law and Politics, 258 179-193 (2014) | ||||||||||
2014 | Sourdin TM, Burstyner N, 'Justice delayed is justice denied', Victoria University Law and Justice Journal, 4 46-60 (2014) [C1] | Nova | |||||||||
2013 |
Richardson E, Sourdin TM, 'Mind the gap: Making evidence-based decisions about self-represented litigants', Journal of Judicial Administration, 22 191-206 (2013) [C1]
|
||||||||||
2013 | Sourdin TM, 'Innovation and alternative dispute resolution', The Arbitrator and Mediator, 32 111-126 (2013) [C1] | ||||||||||
2013 | Sourdin TM, 'Resolving disputes without courts?', The Arbitrator and Mediator, 32 25-40 (2013) [C1] | ||||||||||
2013 |
Sourdin T, 'Good Faith, Bad Faith?', Victoria University Law and Justice Journal, 2 [C1]
|
||||||||||
2013 | Sourdin TM, Burstyner N, 'Cost and time hurdles in civil litigation: exploring the impact of pre-action requirements', Journal of Civil Litigation and Practice, 2 66-84 (2013) [C1] | Nova | |||||||||
2012 |
Sourdin TM, 'Not teaching ADR in law schools? Implications for law students, clients and the ADR field', Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 23 148-156 (2012) [C1]
|
||||||||||
2012 | Sourdin TM, 'Teaching Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Law Schools: Developing the law curriculum to meet the needs of the modern legal practitioner', Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 23 148-148 (2012) | ||||||||||
2012 | Richardson E, Sourdin T, Wallace N, 'Self-Represented Litigants: Gathering Useful Information (2012) | ||||||||||
2012 | Richardson E, Sourdin T, Wallace N, 'Self Represented Litigants: Literature Review (2012) | ||||||||||
2011 |
Sourdin TM, 'Five reasons why judges should conduct settlement conferences', Monash University Law Review, 37 145-170 (2011) [C1]
|
Nova | |||||||||
2011 | Sourdin TM, 'Making litigants more agreeable?', Alternative Law Journal, 36 203-203 (2011) | ||||||||||
2011 | Sourdin TM, 'Thematic issue: Reporting on research from the NADRAC Forum - Introduction', Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 22 3-7 (2011) | ||||||||||
2011 |
Ojelabi L, Sourdin TM, 'Using a values-based approach in mediation', Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 22 258-266 (2011) [C1]
|
||||||||||
2010 | Sourdin TM, 'Poor quality mediation - A system failure', ADR Bulletin, 11 (2010) | ||||||||||
2010 | Sourdin TM, 'Conflict is inevitable...new obligations to try to settle', Law Society Journal, 48 71-73 (2010) | ||||||||||
2010 |
Sourdin TM, 'Making an attempt to resolve disputes before using courts? We all have obligations', Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 21 225-233 (2010)
|
||||||||||
2009 |
Sourdin TM, 'Mediation styles and their impact: Lessons from the Supreme and County Courts of Victoria research project', Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 20 142-152 (2009)
|
||||||||||
2009 | Sourdin TM, Balvin N, 'Mediation in the Supreme and County Courts of Victoria: A summary of the results', ADR Bulletin, 11 (2009) | ||||||||||
2009 | Sourdin TM, 'From accreditation to quality mediation practice - next steps?', ADR Bulletin, 11 (2009) | ||||||||||
2009 | Sourdin T, 'Mediation in the Supreme and County Courts of Victoria (2009) | ||||||||||
2008 | Sourdin TM, Thorpe L, 'Consumer perceptions of dispute resolution processes', Competition and Consumer Law Journal, 15 (2008) | ||||||||||
2008 | Sourdin TM, Gee T, 'Mediation training: Family dispute resolution - series 1/ Basic Family Mediation Skill', Journal of Family Studies, 14 131-133 (2008) | ||||||||||
2008 | Sourdin TM, 'Mediating high conflict and family violence - series 2 and 3 review', Journal of Family Studies, 14 (2008) | ||||||||||
2008 |
Sourdin TM, Thorpe L, 'How do financial services consumers access complaints and dispute resolution processes?', Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 19 25-41 (2008)
|
||||||||||
2008 | Sourdin TM, 'Avoiding the credentialing wars: Mediator accreditation in Australia', The Arbitrator and Mediator, 27 (2008) | ||||||||||
2008 | Sourdin TM, 'Mediator credentialing', ACR Workplace Newsletter, (2008) | ||||||||||
2008 | Sourdin T, 'Conflict Resolution e-Journal Number 1 (June 2007) (2008) | ||||||||||
2008 | Sourdin T, Balvin N, 'Interim Evaluation of Dispute Settlement Centre Victoria Projects: The Neighbourhood Justice Centre Project The Corio/Norlane Community Mediation Project (2008) | ||||||||||
2007 | Sourdin TM, 'An alternative for who? Access to ADR processes', ADR Bulletin, 10 26-27 (2007) | ||||||||||
2007 | Sourdin T, 'Consumer Experience on Complaints Handling and Dispute Resolution - A Research Study Undertaken in Victoria, Australia (2007) | ||||||||||
2007 | Sourdin T, 'Accrediting Mediators - The New National Mediation Accreditation Scheme (Australia) (2007) | ||||||||||
Show 109 more journal articles |
Review (1 outputs)
Year | Citation | Altmetrics | Link |
---|---|---|---|
2023 | Sourdin T, 'Tania Sourdin. Larry A. DiMatteo, Cristina Poncibò and Michel Cannarsa (eds) Cambridge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence: Global Perspectives on Law and Ethics. Prometheus. 2023. Vol. 39(1):60-65. DOI: 10.13169/prometheus.39.1.0060 (2023) |
Conference (4 outputs)
Year | Citation | Altmetrics | Link | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2022 |
Sanchez-Lasaballett E, Sourdin T, Li B, 'Facial Recognition, Issues and Policy Responses', Justice Innovation Symposium, Newcastle, Australia (2022)
|
||||
2022 |
Sourdin T, Li B, Atherton M, Thomas H, 'Improving Customer Experience by Optimising Complaints Handling Practice at DPE', Melbourne, Australia (2022)
|
||||
2017 |
Carlson JL, Armstrong C, Sourdin T, Watts M, Dean A, 'Demontrating Return on Investment of Effective Complaint Management: A Research Synthesis and Agenda for Future Research. Proceedings of 2017 Academy of Marketing Conference.', Hull, England (2017)
|
||||
Show 1 more conference |
Other (4 outputs)
Year | Citation | Altmetrics | Link | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2021 | 'Australasian Dispute Resolution', ( pp.1-1-24-121). Pyrmont: Thomson Reuters (2021) | ||||
2020 |
Sourdin T, Li B, 'People are using artificial intelligence to help sort out their divorce. Would you?', : The Conversation (2020)
|
||||
2019 |
Li B, Sourdin T, 'Technological Impacts on Civil Dispute Resolution', . Hong Kong: Chinese University of Hong Kong (2019)
|
||||
Show 1 more other |
Report (2 outputs)
Year | Citation | Altmetrics | Link |
---|---|---|---|
2015 | Sourdin T, Shanks A, 'Evaluating Alternative Dispute Resolution in Taxation Disputes -- Final Report' (2015) | ||
2012 | Sourdin TM, 'Family Support Program Literature Review, Research into the Family Support Program: Family Law Services', Monash University (2012) |
Grants and Funding
Summary
Number of grants | 25 |
---|---|
Total funding | $1,827,624 |
Click on a grant title below to expand the full details for that specific grant.
Highlighted grants and funding
Better dispute resolution options for the elderly$8,000
Funding body: Monash University
Funding body | Monash University |
---|---|
Project Team | T.Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2015 |
Funding Finish | 2015 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | External |
Category | EXTE |
UON | N |
20223 grants / $119,000
Analysis of Complaints Handling for the RSD Team $85,000
Funding body: NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
Funding body | NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor Tania Sourdin, Doctor Christine Armstrong, Doctor Mirella Atherton, Doctor Bin Li |
Scheme | Tender |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2022 |
Funding Finish | 2022 |
GNo | G2101391 |
Type Of Funding | C2300 – Aust StateTerritoryLocal – Own Purpose |
Category | 2300 |
UON | Y |
The ways in which First Nations approaches to peacebuilding and peacemaking can be recognised in association with the NMAS$29,000
Funding body: Mediator Standards Board
Funding body | Mediator Standards Board |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor Tania Sourdin, Doctor Bin Li |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2022 |
Funding Finish | 2023 |
GNo | G2300004 |
Type Of Funding | C3100 – Aust For Profit |
Category | 3100 |
UON | Y |
Survey on Judges and Technology$5,000
Funding body: Australian Academy of Law
Funding body | Australian Academy of Law |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor Tania Sourdin, Doctor Brian Barry |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2022 |
Funding Finish | 2022 |
GNo | G2200214 |
Type Of Funding | C3200 – Aust Not-for Profit |
Category | 3200 |
UON | Y |
20192 grants / $38,636
Adieu Technologies AC Project$29,545
Funding body: Adieu Technologies Pty Ltd
Funding body | Adieu Technologies Pty Ltd |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor Tania Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2019 |
Funding Finish | 2019 |
GNo | G1900504 |
Type Of Funding | C3100 – Aust For Profit |
Category | 3100 |
UON | Y |
2019 Amendment of the CALD Australian Law School Standards$9,091
Funding body: Council of Australian Law Deans
Funding body | Council of Australian Law Deans |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor Tania Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Project |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2019 |
Funding Finish | 2019 |
GNo | G1900627 |
Type Of Funding | C3200 – Aust Not-for Profit |
Category | 3200 |
UON | Y |
20182 grants / $49,818
Return on Investment of Effective Complaints Management - Public Organisations$41,818
Funding body: SOCAP Australia (Society of Consumer Affairs Professionals Australia)
Funding body | SOCAP Australia (Society of Consumer Affairs Professionals Australia) |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor Tania Sourdin, Professor Jamie Carlson |
Scheme | Research Project |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2018 |
Funding Finish | 2018 |
GNo | G1801052 |
Type Of Funding | C3200 – Aust Not-for Profit |
Category | 3200 |
UON | Y |
Newcastle as a Restorative City$8,000
Funding body: Ian Potter Foundation
Funding body | Ian Potter Foundation |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor Tania Sourdin, Doctor Nicola Ross, Professor John Anderson |
Scheme | Conference Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2018 |
Funding Finish | 2018 |
GNo | G1700771 |
Type Of Funding | C3200 – Aust Not-for Profit |
Category | 3200 |
UON | Y |
20171 grants / $54,712
Restorative justice initiatives in the Hunter and Newcastle’s proclamation as a Restorative City$54,712
Funding body: NED Foundation
Funding body | NED Foundation |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor John Anderson, Professor Tania Sourdin, Doctor Nicola Ross |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Investigator |
Funding Start | 2017 |
Funding Finish | 2020 |
GNo | G1701082 |
Type Of Funding | C3200 – Aust Not-for Profit |
Category | 3200 |
UON | Y |
20163 grants / $83,919
Complaints Handling: Return on Investment$36,825
Funding body: SOCAP Australia (Society of Consumer Affairs Professionals Australia)
Funding body | SOCAP Australia (Society of Consumer Affairs Professionals Australia) |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor Tania Sourdin, Emeritus Professor Martin Watts, Professor Jamie Carlson, Emeritus Professor Alison Dean |
Scheme | Research Project |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2016 |
Funding Finish | 2017 |
GNo | G1601101 |
Type Of Funding | C3200 – Aust Not-for Profit |
Category | 3200 |
UON | Y |
Consultation and development of a regulatory framework for pre injury average weekly earnings (PIAWE)$25,000
Funding body: State Insurance Regulatory Authority
Funding body | State Insurance Regulatory Authority |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor Tania Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Project |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2016 |
Funding Finish | 2016 |
GNo | G1601113 |
Type Of Funding | Other Public Sector - State |
Category | 2OPS |
UON | Y |
Fast track negotiation skills for right to information and information privacy with the OIC$22,094
Funding body: Office of the Information Commissioner (QLD)
Funding body | Office of the Information Commissioner (QLD) |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor Tania Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Project |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2016 |
Funding Finish | 2018 |
GNo | G1601119 |
Type Of Funding | C2300 – Aust StateTerritoryLocal – Own Purpose |
Category | 2300 |
UON | Y |
20157 grants / $237,364
Reviewing Workers Compensation arrangements in Western Australia $58,000
Funding body: Private Consultancy
Funding body | Private Consultancy |
---|---|
Project Team | T. Sourdin |
Scheme | Consultancy |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2015 |
Funding Finish | 2016 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | External |
Category | EXTE |
UON | N |
How do pre action processes work in medical negligence and construction disputes?$45,000
Funding body: Law Foundation of South Australia
Funding body | Law Foundation of South Australia |
---|---|
Project Team | T. Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2015 |
Funding Finish | 2016 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | External |
Category | EXTE |
UON | N |
Reviewing Complaints Professional Standards$45,000
Funding body: Professional Standards Council
Funding body | Professional Standards Council |
---|---|
Project Team | T. Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2015 |
Funding Finish | 2015 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | External |
Category | EXTE |
UON | N |
Evaluation of Pre Action Processes in South Australia$36,364
Funding body: Law Foundation of SA Incorporated
Funding body | Law Foundation of SA Incorporated |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor Tania Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2015 |
Funding Finish | 2016 |
GNo | G1601022 |
Type Of Funding | C3200 – Aust Not-for Profit |
Category | 3200 |
UON | Y |
Using Artificial Intelligence systems to discover more about litigated cases$25,000
Funding body: The Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration (AIJA)
Funding body | The Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration (AIJA) |
---|---|
Project Team | T.Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2015 |
Funding Finish | 2015 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | External |
Category | EXTE |
UON | N |
Exploring Pre action Processes in South Australia$20,000
Funding body: Supreme Court of South Australia
Funding body | Supreme Court of South Australia |
---|---|
Project Team | T.Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2015 |
Funding Finish | 2015 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | External |
Category | EXTE |
UON | N |
Better dispute resolution options for the elderly$8,000
Funding body: Monash University
Funding body | Monash University |
---|---|
Project Team | T.Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2015 |
Funding Finish | 2015 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | External |
Category | EXTE |
UON | N |
20132 grants / $142,000
Design, Development and Administration of an ADR Feedback mechanism$120,000
Funding body: Australian Taxation Office
Funding body | Australian Taxation Office |
---|---|
Project Team | T. Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2013 |
Funding Finish | 2014 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | External |
Category | EXTE |
UON | N |
ACJI Neighbourhood Justice Centre project$22,000
Funding body: Department of Justice, Victoria
Funding body | Department of Justice, Victoria |
---|---|
Project Team | T. Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2013 |
Funding Finish | 2013 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | External |
Category | EXTE |
UON | N |
20121 grants / $260,000
Review of AGD Family Support Program (FSP) Family Law Services$260,000
Funding body: Attorney Generals Department
Funding body | Attorney Generals Department |
---|---|
Project Team | T. Sourdin, T. Brown, and B. Batagol |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2012 |
Funding Finish | 2013 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | External |
Category | EXTE |
UON | N |
20111 grants / $400,000
Australian Centre for Court and Justice System Innovation$400,000
Funding body: Attorney Generals Department, Victoria
Funding body | Attorney Generals Department, Victoria |
---|---|
Project Team | A. Freiberg and T. Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Investigator |
Funding Start | 2011 |
Funding Finish | 2014 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | External |
Category | EXTE |
UON | N |
20101 grants / $60,000
Timely Dispute Management and Resolution in Victorian Civil and Criminal Courts$60,000
Funding body: Department of Justice, Victoria
Funding body | Department of Justice, Victoria |
---|---|
Project Team | T. Sourdin |
Scheme | Research Grant |
Role | Lead |
Funding Start | 2010 |
Funding Finish | 2013 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | External |
Category | EXTE |
UON | N |
20081 grants / $312,825
The development of negotiation support systems that focus upon complying with notions of equity$312,825
Funding body: ARC (Australian Research Council)
Funding body | ARC (Australian Research Council) |
---|---|
Project Team | John Zeleznikow |
Scheme | Linkage Projects |
Role | Investigator |
Funding Start | 2008 |
Funding Finish | 2011 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | Aust Competitive - Commonwealth |
Category | 1CS |
UON | N |
20031 grants / $69,350
The development of legal decision support systems in discretionary domains$69,350
Funding body: Australia Research Council
Funding body | Australia Research Council |
---|---|
Project Team | John Zeleznikow |
Scheme | Linkage Infrastructure Equipment and Facilities |
Role | Investigator |
Funding Start | 2003 |
Funding Finish | 2008 |
GNo | |
Type Of Funding | Aust Competitive - Commonwealth |
Category | 1CS |
UON | N |
Research Supervision
Number of supervisions
Current Supervision
Commenced | Level of Study | Research Title | Program | Supervisor Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
2023 | PhD | Exploring Sustainable Justice | PhD (Law), College of Human and Social Futures, The University of Newcastle | Principal Supervisor |
2022 | PhD | The Role of Intermediaries from Police Interviews to Jury Trials: Increasing Access to Justice | PhD (Law), College of Human and Social Futures, The University of Newcastle | Co-Supervisor |
2020 | PhD | The Common Law Civil Action for Breach of Statutory Duty: History, Elements and Prospects | PhD (Law), College of Human and Social Futures, The University of Newcastle | Principal Supervisor |
2019 | PhD | Implementing Change in a Conservative Australian Legal Context by Assessing the Value of Novel Fiduciary Relationships with Approaches in Foreign Jurisdictions. Will the Judiciary or Legislature be Persuaded? | PhD (Law), College of Human and Social Futures, The University of Newcastle | Co-Supervisor |
2019 | PhD | A Comparative Analysis of Fiduciary Law's Future: Evolving Relationships and Fusionist Tendencies | PhD (Law), College of Human and Social Futures, The University of Newcastle | Co-Supervisor |
Past Supervision
Year | Level of Study | Research Title | Program | Supervisor Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
2023 | PhD |
Where stress presides: Investigating occupational stress within the Australian judiciary <span _ngcontent-dspace-angular-c458="" class="pre-wrap ng-star-inserted">The thesis presents the first empirical research on the psychological health of the Australian judiciary. Judicial officers have an important and difficult job in democratic societies. They are senior members of the legal profession, the third arm of government, and guardians of the rule of law. They also manage demanding workloads, disturbing case material, and high-stakes decision-making. Several decades of Australian and international empirical research has demonstrated alarmingly high rates of stress and mental ill-health among lawyers and law students. However, judicial wellbeing has not received the same research attention, especially in Australia. The dearth of robust research impinges effective and evidence-based intervention to support judicial officers in their complex and critical work.</span> |
Psychology, Melbourne University | Co-Supervisor |
2022 | PhD | The Inexorable Expansion of Executive Detention in Australia: The Case for Law Reform | PhD (Law), College of Human and Social Futures, The University of Newcastle | Co-Supervisor |
2020 | PhD | What is an Effective or Good Mediator: Exploring empirical research on mediator attributes and behaviour | PhD (Law), College of Human and Social Futures, The University of Newcastle | Principal Supervisor |
2019 | PhD | Lawyer Approaches to Court-Connected Mediation: A New Case Study | PhD (Law), College of Human and Social Futures, The University of Newcastle | Co-Supervisor |
2012 | PhD | Online Dispute resolution | Law, La Trobe University | Principal Supervisor |
2012 | Honours | Conflict in the Compact City | Law, Victoria University | Co-Supervisor |
2012 | PhD | The legal and institutional framework for the enforcement of online consumer arbitration awards: evidence from Australia and Sri Lanka | Law, La Trobe University | Co-Supervisor |
2010 | PhD | Culture and Conflict | Law, La Trobe University | Principal Supervisor |
2006 | PhD | The Management of intractable natural resource conflict in Australia | Law, La Trobe University | Principal Supervisor |
Research Projects
Newcastle as a Restorative City 2016 -
To transform a city into a restorative city where restorative practices are implemented broadly to restore damaged relationships and manage social and community challenges across all sectors of the city involves a change in attitudes at multiple levels (personal, institutional, city) to support respectful dialogue and a preference for social inclusion and restoration where individual or institutional harm has occurred to individuals in the community. This often goes hand in hand with the development of restorative justice programs and restorative practices implemented in schools and other community organisations. Although other cities, including Canberra, have been pursuing similar goals and present important learning opportunities in relation to their various strategies, it is clear that restorative cities cannot be transplanted. Such cities must be built and grow in the context of their particular demography, citizenry, strengths and challenges.
Newcastle is the seventh largest city in Australia, with a population of over 160,000 people. Although it is experiencing urban renewal, there are questions about whether social and cultural renewal will co-occur with the much-needed economic renewal of the city. There are various ‘restorative-type’ practices occurring in different organisations and sectors of the city but there is limited sharing of experiences and strategies. We will consider the synergies existing and developing in Newcastle to progress the vision of a restorative city together with the inevitable barriers and scepticism associated with such significant social and cultural change. Even in the face of many significant hurdles to be overcome, we are optimistic that the project will gather momentum and incrementally move towards the ultimate vision of a restorative city.
The research team is comprised of:
- Dr Nicola Ross – Senior Lecturer, Newcastle Law School. Well respected and high-profile researcher in relation to child protection and issues affecting family cohesion and welfare in Australia and international contexts. She has published widely on the legal constructs of children and their voices in autonomous decision-making.
- Dr John Anderson – Associate Professor, Newcastle Law School. Leading and experienced criminal law and justice scholar who principally researches and publishes in the areas of sentencing and evidence. His scholarship has an overarching concern with equity and fairness in the criminal justice system. He has effectively collaborated with various scholars and practitioners both in Australia and internationally.
This project has so far resulted in two conference presentations, one peer review journal article and will be hosting an international symposium over two days in June 2018.
Grants
A Restorative City for New South Wales: Could Newcastle be a Model?
Funding body: Nurturing Evolutionary Development Inc (NED Foundation)
Funding body | Nurturing Evolutionary Development Inc (NED Foundation) |
---|---|
Description | A restorative city is one in which restorative justice and restorative practices are implemented widely throughout the life of the city. Restorative justice has traditionally been associated with criminal justice systems, where techniques such as victim-offender mediations, restorative justice conferencing and re-integrative shaming are employed. These techniques bring the offender, victim, community members and other interested parties together to discuss the offending, and propose ways forward which heal the victim and the community, while reintegrating the offender into the community. Restorative cities go further by introducing restorative practices throughout the community: in education, in social services, in law enforcement, and in workplaces. Mediations, conferences and relationship-building exercises are used to encourage the resolution of disputes and disagreements through communication, to address inappropriate behaviour, and to promote a caring and inclusive culture. Restorative cities have many positive impacts in the community. The introduction of restorative justice into criminal systems has resulted in less offending, less recidivism and greater participant satisfaction with the process by all parties including those offended against. In schools, students learn how to build relationships, solve disputes and understand other points of view. This leads to higher attendance, improved educational outcomes and improved school culture. Workplaces that engage with restorative practices are more productive. Restorative cities are safer, happier, hopeful places where community spirit is restored and the social fabric of the city transformed. Mary Porter AM recently moved to the Newcastle area. Mary is a former member of the ACT Legislative Assembly, who is committed to community development. She played a pivotal role in the movement to transform Canberra into a Restorative City. Mary had a similar vision for the transformation of Newcastle and approached Newcastle Law School to partner with her to undertake this. Newcastle Law School’s newly appointed Dean, Professor Sourdin is an international expert in dispute resolution. Associate Professor John Anderson, who teaches evidence and criminal law, and Dr Nicola Ross, who teaches family and child law, have long-standing interests in restorative justice and practices, as does Shaun McCarthy, Director of the University of Newcastle Legal Centre. Newcastle has pockets of disadvantage in relation to unemployment, income, education, housing, child welfare, and criminal justice. It has recently faced challenges due to the erosion of traditional industry & employment opportunities. While plans are underway for urban renewal in the city’s CBD, Newcastle is also in need of social, cultural and economic renewal. A significant contribution to this broad renewal could be made through Newcastle becoming a restorative city. The support of key stakeholders is required to achieve the transformation of Newcastle into a restorative city. In other restorative cities, these stakeholders include community members from the criminal justice system, government, education, health, business, and community welfare. Assembling a task force to carry the project forward is the first step. Co-ordination with key stakeholders is required to introduce restorative practices throughout the community. Other restorative cities have commenced by introducing restorative practices into organisations that work with children and young people, such as schools, child and community welfare organisations, and the youth justice system. This strategy aims to ensure all children become experts in restorative practices, to ensure that tomorrow’s leaders are able to participate in strong, inclusive communities, and are ready to face the many challenges undoubtedly ahead. |
Scheme | Community Project Grant |
Newcastle as a Restorative City
Funding body: Ian Potter Foundation
Funding body | Ian Potter Foundation |
---|---|
Project Team | Professor Tania Sourdin, Doctor Nicola Ross, Professor John Anderson |
Scheme | Conference Grant |
Publications
Anderson JL, Ross N, 'A Restorative City for New South Wales - Could Newcastle be a Model?', Journal of Judicial Administration, 27 74-91 (2018) [C1]
Collaborators
Name | Organisation |
---|---|
Doctor Nicola Mary Ross | University of Newcastle |
Professor Tania Michelle Sourdin | University of Newcastle |
Edit
News
News • 24 Feb 2021
Chief Justice recognises Newcastle's newest lawyers among best in the country
“Great lawyers are known to come out of Newcastle, and I am confident that today is no exception.”
News • 24 Nov 2020
Robots don black cap for lower court judges
Professor Tania Sourdin predics that simple civil cases will be decided by computer systems in the future
News • 13 Oct 2020
Lessons Learnt: Special Issue report filters global best practices on COVID-19 response
A panel of experts have ‘filtered’ the most compelling policy and technology responses to COVID-19 worldwide, as governments continue to grapple with the devastating impacts of the pandemic.
News • 1 Sep 2020
Public organisations that manage complaints well reap the rewards, new research finds
For the first time, public sector organisations can now measure the social returns on complaint handling, revealing the holistic value of effective customer care. New research, conducted for the Society of Consumer Affairs Professionals (SOCAP) Australia by the University of Newcastle, has found that for every dollar that a public organisation spends on effectively handling complaints, the organisation can reap up to a $5 return on investment (ROI).
News • 31 Aug 2020
Machine-enhanced decision making; and clapping, flapping drones
Professor Tania Sourdin talks to ABC Radio National about her work on justice apps
News • 28 Jul 2020
Professor Tania Sourdin says there is a need for cheaper and smarter dispute resolution options in family law
Professor Tania Sourdin in the Newcastle Herald discusses using apps for family dispute resolution
News • 22 Jul 2020
People are using artificial intelligence to help sort out their divorce. Would you?
Would you let an AI help sort out your divorce?
News • 10 Jul 2020
Courts not ready for post-COVID world
Professor Tania Sourdin on legal systems in the post-COVID world.
News • 23 Jul 2018
Return On Investment Of Effective Complaints Management Report
University academics have found that return on investment in complaint handling can be as high as 1000%
News • 31 May 2018
Transforming Newcastle into a restorative city
The University of Newcastle is leading the quest to transform Newcastle into a restorative city, in a collaborative effort to build healthy, harmonious communities.
News • 15 May 2018
Putting justice into practice for National Law Week
To mark National Law Week, the University of Newcastle in partnership with The Lock Up will bring together artists, writers, lawyers, academics, students, families of victims, and those interested in areas of social justice for an Art & Law Symposium presented in conjunction with the justiceINjustice exhibition.
News • 15 Mar 2018
UON research reveals benefits of effective complaints handling
University of Newcastle research has revealed that every dollar invested in complaints handling has potential returns of investment of up to $10 for a business.
News • 6 Jul 2016
Law School welcomes Professor Tania Sourdin
The Newcastle Law School has welcomed Professor Tania Sourdin, who has commenced in her role as the Dean and Head of the School.
Professor Tania Sourdin
Position
President of Academic Senate
President Academic Senate's Office
Vice-Chancellor's Division
Contact Details
tania.sourdin@newcastle.edu.au | |
Phone | (02) 492 15119 |
Office
Room | X-825 |
---|---|
Building | NeW Space |
Location | City Campus , |