Pragmatism and Precision: Psychology in the Service of Civil Litigation

References

• Annetts v. Australian Stations Pty Ltd 2002 HCA 35.
   Google Scholar
• American Psychiatric Association (APA). (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, (4th ed., text revision). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Plaintiff Lawyers Association. (2003). National Workers' Compensation and Occupational Health and Safety Frameworks, June 2003. Productivity Commission submission.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Psychological Society (APS). (1997). APS working group on the measurement of psychological impairment. Melbourne: Australian Psychological Society.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Psychological Society (APS). (2003a). Submission to the proactivity commissions inquiry into national workers' compensation and occupational health and safety frameworks. Melbourne: Australian Psychological Society.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Psychological Society (APS). (2003b). Supplementary submission to the productivity commissions inquiry into national workers' compensation and occupational health & safety frameworks. Melbourne: Australian Psychological Society.
   Google Scholar
• Banks v. Goodfellow 1870 5 QB 549, at 565.
   Google Scholar
• Birgden, A. (2002). Therapeutic jurisprudence and “good lives”: A rehabilitation framework for corrections. Australian Psychologist, 37(3), 180–186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Civil Liability Regulation. (2003). Queensland. Retrieved from http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/C/CivilLiabR03.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Clark v. Hall and Anor 2006 QSC 274.
   Google Scholar
• Cocchiarella, L. & Andersson, G. (2001). Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment(5th ed.). Chicago: AMA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Committee of Eminent Persons into the Law of Negligence (2002). Review of the Law of Negligence: Final Report (Ipp report). Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, G. R. (2008). The Psychiatric Impairment Rating Scale: Is it a valid measure? Australian Psychologist, 43(3), 205–212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eastman, N. (2004). Translating Mental Health Science into Law. Conference Workshop presented at the 2004 Australian New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and The Law, 24th Annual Conference. Port Douglas, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, D. (1997). Psychology and law: Justice diverted. In D. Fox & I. Prilleltensky (Eds.), Critical psychology: An introduction (pp. 217–232). London: Sage Publication.
   Google Scholar
• Freckelton, I., Reddy, P., & Selby, H. (1999). Australian judicial perspectives on expert evidence: An empirical study (“Judges' Study”). Melbourne: Australian Institute of Judicial Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Freckelton, I., Reddy, P., & Selby, H. (2001). Australian magistrates' perspectives on expert evidence: An empirical study (“Magistrates' Study”). Melbourne: Australian Institute of Judicial Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Gaughwin, P. C. (2004). Beyond the noise and smoke: Some challenges for mental health professionals entering the forensic arena. Psychology, Psychiatry and the Law, 11(1), 44–49.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, E. (2003). Psychology in civil litigation: An overview and introduction to the special issue. Law and Human Behavior, 27(1), 1–4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaensch v. Coffey 1984 54 HCA 52.
   Google Scholar
• Parmegiani, J., Lovell, D., Skinner, Y., & Milton, R. (2001). Psychiatric impairment rating scale. NSW Australia. Retrieved from http://www.cmspecialists.com.au/PIRS-1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Tame v. New South Wales 2002 HCA 35.
   Google Scholar
• Warren, W. G. (2004). Ethical considerations in private practice psychology forensic work: An Australian perspective. International Journal of Forensic Psychology, 1(2), 14–20.
   Google Scholar
• Woolf, M. R. (1996). Access to Justice, Final Report of the Lord Chancellor on the Civil Justice System in England and Wales. London: HMSO.
   Google Scholar