Jerry_Atrick

There'll be a lot of soul searching in the Liberal party for a bit.. Where did it all go wrong? I have a bit of advice to them.. Steer the ship from conservatively regressive to convertatively progressive.. the voter demographics are moving and they ain't moving with them.

8 degrees here heading for a max of 15.

It has been a very bad night for the Greens.. no doubt about that

Just listening to a rather happy Penny Wong... but looking down at the seat count: 85 to Labor - a majority of 10 - up from 1.. with 18 seats in doubt.. And so far, Greens have none. Wow! Was it all Chump?

Last election, he was much the same for him... Will the Libs win the election, or are they so beholden to the Murdoch press and their sponsors, they they will continue the trajectory? Australia needs a strong and principled opposition for all Aussies. Currently listening to Dutton's speech. And, I have to say, his speech is magnanimous in defeat. Feel for his kids though.. I understand why leaders feel the need to put their kids up on the stage, but that is something they all could drop.

Yes.. The Libs pollster on the ABC is again looking very forlorn and can't see a way forward at the moment.

Wow,,, This early in the count, and the ABC are saying Labor retains the government: (From The Age): I think it is a bit early to call it, but its astonishing, given how early it is in the count. Postals and early votes to count, too..

Well, we're on the home straight.. just waiting for the ABC count to start

1930s happening over again

I sincerely hope the interview in this vid was edited

Wow.. I think it is time the AEC wielded some of its power. It doesn't matter what side does it, when it is done, consequences have to flow:

Yeovilton has a great museum.. Over 'ere, if you get caught speeding under 10 or 15mph over the limit, you can do speed awareness courses rather than take points on your licence (only once every three years - so if you are caught again in that three years, you have points and a fine). The offeret me a course at Yeovilton.. I jumped on it and the lady on the phone could not understand why I would want to do it there instead of Taunton. During lunch and other breaks, although we weren't supposed to, we meandered amongst the exhibits.

I'll be watching the ABC count tomorrow, which will morning to about afternoon. My niece and her boyfriend are coming over for the long weekend in the morning. .They will realise what a nerd I am..

Just to clarify - not to voluntarily disclose information - they obviously will be under an obligation of disclosure if they are asked.

Unf, in these cases it is not that simple. The general contract law is a thrid party can't be bound to a contract without knowledge and some for of agreement. There will be some form of body corporate, and for larger apartments, these will normally be either a trust or strata company - either way a serparate legal entity - that will have an agreement/contract with the apartment owners. The agreement (contract), is usually in standard form with variations depending on the amenities of the complex, but basically that agreement will be for providing maintenance and services (usually in a schedule) to the apartments in return for a periodical fee and any top ups as required. There will be reaonableness clauses and things like that, but they often allow quite a lot of leeway to the "body corporate". So, energy contract will be between the energy company and the body corporate, and a separate contract will be between the body corporate and apartment owners. Therefore, in general, the apartment owners are not third parties to the contract between the body corporate and energy provider, because the body corporate has discretion who to contract with to provide those services. The apartment owners are being billed under the body corporate/management agreement. So, as long as the body corporate is conforming to that agreement (and there will normally be a provision of reasonable charges, but that is based on any excess over the costs, not on ensuring the supplier costs are reasonable per se. But there are other areas or law the apartment owners can pursue. There should be a good faith requirement in the body corporate agreement. And if there isn't one, the courts will usually imply a good faith agreement. That being the case, if it can be shown the contract was entered into for the benefit of the developer above the apartment holders and disclosure of the contract would materially affect the price paid, there is a good chance the body corporate could be sued for damages. This would probably only apply to the owners who bought off the plan, though, as they are the ones who are directly implacted; subsequent buyers will probably be taken under the caveat emptor (buyer beware) general rule when buying property as it is as a transfer between twoo provate individuals and not a company selling as product to a consumer. Unless there was an effort by a buyer to understand the nature of the services purchased by the body corporate, there is little chance of misrepresentation, as the body corporate would not have disclosed, let alone misrepresented it. The maxim that the law doesn't suffer fools puts the onus on each party of the contract to seek information, not to disclose it. Obviously in property law, there are mandatory disclosures that have to be made (changes state by state). But, if this is not one of them, then misrep will generally not be available. The other may be the exit fees being seen as penalties. Although Australian contract law allows penalties (UK law doesn't - only liquidated damages), they will generally have to be proportional. A contract break with a utility company would not normally be seens as such a fundamental risk of the contract to the utility company that it would justify exhorbitant penalties. So, if the $135K or whatever the break amount was, is, say for one apartments rather than shared amongst all, the court would strike that down and probably, for being such fwits in trying to fleece the apartment holders, reduce the break amouont to zero. What the courts will normally do is reduce it to a reasonable amount based . Similary, if the break amount is the same on the first month and the last month of the contract - i.e. it doesn't have some form of step down, then they will usually do the same. And usually, this will be based on how much the contract would have grossed the utility for the term of the contract minus what has already been paid, plus some for admin charges. So, they probably have some remedy, but unf, it will unlikely be misrepresentation. They will need good lawyers and make sure the electricity company has the funds to cough up the legal bills.

Have you been to the Mach Loop in northern Wales (I think it is)?

https://www.premier.sa.gov.au/media-releases/news-archive/sa-records-nations-biggest-fall-in-power-prices Hmm... that is the volatility most people would like, I would suggest.

That is misogynistic.. But it is funny..

Too right.. Neither does Greenland or the Netherlands; the former in the firing line of annexation and the latter Does WWIII break out between the US and its allies and the rest of the world wait to rummage through the remains? Also, the rest of the world is also directly impacted by his "policies" and we also don't get to vote. All round ship show while the Chump is at the helm

Apart from Albo who are you talking about is in the race for the PM-ship. If not Albo, who will take it? I believe the housing crisis had its genesis well before Albo was near the lodge

I think this is an appropriate place to post this. A major power outage has swept across Spain and Portugal, knocking out transport, mobile networks, and other infrastructure. I am thinking there could be nerfarious play.. another reason to go off grid... (ps didn't link it as it is on the guardian's live feed and by the time you clicked on the link, it is probable thee would be something different showing)

Haven't they already done that at the higher courts?

Vid not available in my country 😞 Will have to load up a VPN

The question is not who, but what.. and the answer is the constitution that they swore to uphold. So, as they swore to uphold the constitution, they gave the justices a right to judge them.

I thought I would start a thread of social media content and providers that is not political that are worth promoting. First cab off the rank from me is Road Trucking Adventures. Great vids of a road train trucker and his travels. He is getting popular and now sadly does members only vids, but these are gems: And he is obviously very respectful because he doesn't hold back the great Aussie salute.