British and Irish Legal Information Institute (BAILII) - <http://www.bailii.org/>
Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) - <http://www.canlii.org/>
Hong Kong Legal Information Institute (HKLII) - <http://www.hklii.org/>
Legal Information Institute (Cornell) (LII (Cornell)) - <http://www.law.cornell.edu/>
Pacific Islands Legal Information Institute (PacLII) - <http://www.paclii.org/>
In addition, databases hosted only on WorldLII include
We intend that, subject to limitations of resources, we will host on WorldLII significant databases made available to us by Legislatures, Courts, Law Reform Commissions, and the like from jurisdictions where there is currently no national or regional LII that can act as a host, particularly from Asian countries and from Commonwealth countries. Decisions of international courts and tribunals, and internationally-oriented law journals will also be included.
An extract from the WorldLII search options (Full Search Form)
The following search options have been implemented:
Geographically-based search options will become particularly interesting when WorldLII expands to include databases from more than one LII or other source in a region. The geographical options provided at present include (with current content listed):
Finally, users may choose their own combinations of the 290 databases accessible from WorldLII: 'customised' searches. It may also be valuable to provide for users a selection of the most obviously useful subject- specific customisations, such as 'All administrative review Tribunals' or 'All unfair competition tribunals' or 'All anti-discrimination tribunals'.
Since 1996, AustLII had been advocating the adoption of a Court-designated citation by Australian Courts, and had proposed a similar method of citation to the Council of Chief Justices in 1998. Following the lead of the High Court and the Council of Chief Justices, almost all Australian Courts and Tribunals have now adopted the same method of citation, and have adopted an agreed set of Court designators (such as 'HCA'). It has been implemented on AustLII as the method of citing the decisions of the more than 70 Courts and Tribunals on that system, and is in use by other publishers as a method of parallel citation to their own 'publisher-specific' means of citation. The same citation method has been implemented for the decisions of the Courts of Pacific Island countries on PacLII, and the decisions of the Hong Kong Courts on HKLII.
With the creation of BAILII in 2000, a similar method of citation and set of Court designators was used to identify the decisions of the Courts and Tribunals on that system. The English Courts, assisted to a very large extent by the efforts of Lord Justice Brooke, quickly took up the challenge of adopting a method of Court-designated citations suitable for electronic publication. The same citation method was adopted as had been adopted by the Australian Courts, and trailed on BAILII, but with a number of progressive modifications to the Court designators used, as the preferences of the Courts became clear. These changes were then 'retro-fitted' to the BAILII databases. Since than, the English Courts have continued to make advances, as Lord Justice Brooke points out, by adopting paragraph numbering in their decisions, and through Practice Directions in 2001 and 2002 implementing and consolidating the new system. The first Practice Direction states:
" The neutral citation will be the official number attributed to the judgment by the court and must always be used on at least one occasion when the judgment is cited in a later judgment. Once the judgment is reported, the neutral citation will appear in front of the familiar citation from the law report series. Thus: Smith v Jones  EWCA Civ 10 at ;  QB 124;  2 All ER 364, etc. The paragraph number must be the number allotted by the court in all future versions of the judgment."The second Practice Direction concludes "Although the judges cannot dictate the form in which law publishers reproduce the judgments of the court, this form of citation contains the official number given to each judgment which they hope will be reproduced wherever the judgment is republished, in addition to the reference given in any particular series of reports". By these means, the English Courts have made it clear their intention that the Court-designated citation should not be used and not ignored, both by those who are citing cases before a Court, and by those who are re-publishing the Court's decision.
In Canada a very similar neutral citation method has been adopted, and is used on CanLII. For example, the third decision of the Supreme Court of Canada for 2003 has the citation '2003 SCC 3'. Court-designated citations are therefore now in use in many jurisdictions in the Commonwealth, and in relation to all of the Courts whose decisions are available through WorldLII.
In WorldLII and its collaborating LIIs, cross-national hypertext links are only implemented to a limited extent as yet. For example, on WorldLII and BAILII in the database 'England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions', the decision Yasin Sepet And Erdem Bulbul V. Secretary Of State For Home Department (UNHCR Intervening)  EWCA Civ 681 <http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2001/681.html> contains two automated hypertext links to Australian High Court decisions on WorldLII (and AustLII), as shown in the following extract (at para 88).
Extract from a UK court decision with automated hypertext links to Australian cases
This example also shows a UK court citing an Australian decision by its Court-designated 'HCA' citation, rather than a publisher-designated citation. Because AustLII and BAILII identify all cases by their Court-designated citations, these links can be created automatically between and within national collections on WorldLII.
For examples of such cross-LII hypertext links on HKLII, the decision in Sin Hoi Chu & others v. The Director of Immigration  HKCFA 3 (10 January 2002) provides good examples, as it includes hypertext links to cases on BAILII (eg, at , R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Bajram Zeqiri  EWCA Civ 607)), to legislation on BAILII (eg at , UK Education (Schools) Act 1997) and to cases on AustLII (eg at , to University of Wollongong v. Metwally (1984) 158 CLR 447).
Where Courts cite cases by use of publisher-designated citation, the task of recognising the location of cases on WorldLII from the citation is much more difficult and is a major research and development task for the future development of WorldLII and for national LIIs. HKLII is developing, with the assistance of the Law Library of the University of Hong Kong, a comparative case citation table for all Hong Kong courts, to enable comprehensive hypertext links to be created.
WorldLII Catalog front page for the Commonwealth
The front page in the Catalog for the Commonwealth lists Commonwealth institutions, and also links to the 'Member Countries' page below which conveniently links to the indexes for each Commonwealth country. A search from the front page with the 'Only WorldLII Catalog >> Commonwealth' option checked will search law websites from all Commonwealth countries and institutions but not from other countries.
The Commonwealth Member Countries page in the Catalog
For each Commonwealth country listed, there is a substantial index of legal information available, illustrated below by the entries for Nigeria.
Nigeria front page (extract) in the WorldLII catalog
As well as these specific catalog links, the Stored Search 'Search all World Law: Nigeria' finds 5788 web pages of legal material referring to Nigeria by use of WorldLII's Websearch facility. The Catalog can be used in this way to find large amounts of legal materials relevant to any Commonwealth country, no matter how small or with few websites of its own.
This systematic approach to legal research is implemented in two different ways in WorldLII and its collaborating LIIs: (i) invitations in search results to repeat searches over different collections; and (ii) the WorldLII Catalog interface which provides search options of different scope over different collections. They are outlined below (some still use the old terminology 'World Law' rather than 'WorldLII Catalog'). Other implementations of a systematic approach will no doubt be implemented as WorldLII develops.
Where a user starts research from a single LII (eg PacLII), search
results appear headed by a message such as the following:
Repeat search over WorldLII Databases ; WorldLII Websearch ; Google
The user is therefore invited to broaden their research by repeating the search automatically over WorldLII Databases (represented by the bold lines in the diagram below). When the search is repeated over WorldLII Databases, the search results invite the user to repeat the search over the World Catalog. When the user repeats the search over World Catalog, the search results then invite them to repeat the search over Google (and translate the search into Google syntax).
Similarly, anyone who commences research on the WorldLII Catalog is invited to repeat their search over WorldLII Databases (represented by the lighter lines in the diagram below). Both the WorldLII Databases and WorldLII Catalog searches invite a further search over Google.
A systematic research path, starting from a single LII (in bold)
How can this be achieved through one reasonably transparent interface? We are implementing it through the WorldLII Catalog interface, as shown below for the 'Legislation' page. The fourth option 'Only WorldLII Legislation' is additional to the options available on most pages.
Proposed World Law search interface on the Legislation page
On WorldLII Catalog pages where this is implemented, the user's context in browsing the catalog (eg 'Legislation') will determine the scope of the second and fourth options offered. So, for example, if the user is at the WorldLII Catalog page for all 'Law Reform' then the available options will include 'Only WorldLII Catalog - Law Reform' and 'Only WorldLII Databases Law Reform'.
In relation to legislation, 20 of 56 Commonwealth countries have legislation collections online. The most comprehensive collections are from Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa, and the United Kingdom. WorldLII (through its collaborating LIIs) is by far the largest single source of legislation, with legislation databases from 24 Commonwealth jurisdictions (8 countries) covering all Australian jurisdictions, most Canadian jurisdictions, most UK jurisdictions, some Pacific jurisdictions, and in addition the historically related jurisdictions of Hong Kong and the Republic of Ireland. Permission has also been obtained to add New Zealand legislation, and that of some other Pacific countries, to WorldLII. The most significant improvements to WorldLII's Commonwealth legislation coverage would be if it was possible to add the existing legislation collections of India, South Africa and Singapore. However, there are no significant legislation collections available on the Internet from 36 Commonwealth countries, and the addition of collections from these countries, on WorldLII or elsewhere, would be a significant improvement.
Case law shows a similar pattern: 21 countries have significant online case law collections, but 35 countries do not have any. By far the largest single source of Commonwealth case law is WorldLII which through its cooperating LIIs and its own databases has 164 case law databases from Commonwealth jurisdictions (13 countries), many of these being databases containing thousands of decisions. In addition, WorldLII is now adding to its coverage the content of the INTERIGHTS database of Commonwealth and international human rights decisions from almost all countries in the Commonwealth. WorldLII also contains many decisions from International Courts and Tribunals which affect the law of Commonwealth countries, such as the WTO tribunals, International Court of Justice, and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. WorldLII's national and international case law is clearly a potentially valuable tool to assist in the creation of a more international common law, but its value would be enhanced greatly by the addition of decisions of senior Courts in the Indian subcontinent, Africa, Asia, the Caribbean and other parts of the Commonwealth not well represented as yet.
The situation with law reform online is rather different. There are extensive reports available online from 23 jurisdictions in 9 countries. Many countries do not have formal law reform bodies, so it is difficult to state how many Commonwealth countries' reports are 'missing'. WorldLII's coverage is as yet very limited: it only includes the Australian Law Reform Commission (though the database is very large), though it does include law reform reports from the historically related jurisdictions of Hong Kong and the Republic of Ireland.
The countries with significant legislation only partly overlap those with significant case law: 14 countries are on both lists, so another 13 countries are on one list only, giving 27 of 56 Commonwealth countries with at least one type of significant collection. If we add law reform reports to this consideration, only 6 of 14 countries with both legislation and case law collections also have law reform collections online. There are two countries with law reform online but no other collections, bringing the total number of countries with significant collections of at least one type to 29, just over half of all Commonwealth countries.
This survey supports the contention in the title of this paper: that WorldLII can be seen as a new 'home' for Commonwealth law, in the sense that it is already the largest single source of law on the Internet for Commonwealth law (and for the common law), and its structure and policy allows for development toward being a more comprehensive instrument. The policy of WorldLII on this potential development is discussed in the concluding part of this paper.
The obvious limitations of this Table are that it only includes a statistically insignificant two cases per jurisdiction, it does not include details of non-Commonwealth cases cited, and it treats the Privy Council as a UK Court rather than as a separate jurisdiction. A distinction may also need to be made between civil and criminal matters.
Bearing in mind these limitations, the Table suggests that the decisions most frequently cited by Courts in other Commonwealth countries are those of Courts of the UK (60), Canada (10), Australia (5), and New Zealand (5), but decisions from 10 other countries are also cited. Decisions from the majority of countries involved some citation of cases from other Commonwealth countries. A more comprehensive study could show quite a different result.
The Table also shows that quite a few of the overseas cases cited (10) are able to be found on the various Legal Information Institutes comprising WorldLII, particularly BAILII, CanLII and AustLII, even though those systems only cover cases decided in recent years, and cases cited are often much older. In this sense, WorldLII is already becoming a 'home' for emerging Commonwealth jurisprudence.
Brackets ( ) indicates number of different databases available
|Australia||Cth (4), ACT (4), NSW (2), NT (2), QLD (2), SA (2), TAS (1), VIC (2), WA (2)||AustLII/WorldLII|
|Cth & territories (50), ACT (1), NSW (1), NT (1), QLD (3), SA (1), TAS (2), VIC (3), WA (3)||Government sites|
|Bahamas||Lex Bahamas||Lex Bahamas|
|Bangladesh||Law Translation Project||Heidelberg University|
|Belies||Laws of Belize||BelizeLaw.Org|
|Canada||Federal, Québec, New Brunswick, Alberta, Nova Scotia ; Constitutional Documents||CanLII/WorldLII|
|Federal (2), Alberta (2), British Columbia (2), Manitoba (2), New Brunswick (2), Newfoundland & Labrador (2), NW Territories (2), Nova Scotia (3), Nunavut (2), Ontario (3), Prince Edward Island (2), Québec (2), Saskatchewan (2), Yukon (3)||Government sites|
|Fiji||Fiji Legislation||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|Maha Library||Network Publishing|
|Lesotho||Bills and acts||Lesotho Government|
|Nauru||Nauru Statutes||USP (PacLII/WorldLII approved)|
|New Zealand||Public Access to Legislation Project||NZ Parlt. Counsel Office
|Nigeria||Laws of the Federation of Nigeria||Nigeria Law|
|Samoa||Samoa Legislation||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|Singapore||Singapore Statutes Online||A-Gs Chambers of Singapore|
|Solomon Islands||Solomon Islands Legislation||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|South Africa||Legislation||S. Africa Government Online|
|Online Hypertext Series||Acts Online|
|Tonga||Tonga Legislation||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|United Kingdom||United Kingdom statutes &, instruments, Northern Ireland statutes, Welsh instruments, Scottish statutes & instruments||BAILII/WorldLII|
|United Kingdom, Northern Ireland Scotland and Wales legislation & instruments||HMSO|
|Wales Legislation Online||Cardiff Law School|
|Vanuatu||Legislation||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|Zambia||The Acts of Zambia||Zambia Legal Information Institute (ZamLII)|
Brackets ( ) indicates number of different databases available
|Multi-jurisdiction||Human rights cases (980 cases)||INTERIGHTS
(being added to WorldLII)
|Commonwealth (22), including High Court, Family Court, Federal Court, Industrial Relations Court, High Court Transcripts and Bulletins), ACT (5), NSW (16), NT (3), QLD (11), SA (9), TAS (2), VIC (4), WA (4), Supreme Court of Norfolk Island (1)||AustLII/WorldLII|
|Commonwealth (7), ACT (4), NSW (12), NT (1), QLD (4), SA (1), TAS (5), VIC (4), WA (3)||Mainly government|
|Canada Federal (4) Includes Supreme Court, Federal Court, Tax Court ad Competition Tribunal; Alberta (3), British Columbia (3), Manitoba (3), New Brunswick (3), Newfoundland and Labrador (3), Northwest Territories (3), Nova Scotia (6), Nunavut (2), Ontario (2), Prince Edward Island (2), Québec (9), Saskatchewan (3), Yukon (4)||CanLII/WorldLII|
|Canada (8), Alberta Courts (Court of Appeal, Court of Queen's Bench, Provincial Court) (3), British Columbia (6), Federal Court of Canada, Manitoba (1), New Brunswick (0), Newfoundland and Labrador (0), Northwest Territories (0), Nova Scotia (0), Nunavut (0), Ontario (6), Prince Edward Island (1), Québec (5), Saskatchewan (1), Yukon (0)||Mainly government|
|Cases||Indigenous Bar Association|
|Cyprus||Cypriot High Court (Appellate, Administrative and Supreme Court)||CyLaw.Com (Uses WorldLII's SINO Search Engine)|
|Fiji||Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, High Court, Fiji Magistrate's Court||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|India||Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, Andhra Pradesh High Court, Jammu & Kashmir High Court, Orissa High Court, Bombay High Court, Madras High Court||Judgement Information Service (JUDIS)|
|High Court of Kerala (Extracts)||Kerala Internet Communications|
|Supreme Court; Companies Act Judgements; Income Tax Judgements||Vakilno1.com (includes Decisions from various courts)|
|Jamaica||Supreme Court||Supreme Court of Jamaica|
|Kiribati||Court of Appeal, High Court, High Court of the Gilbert Islands||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|Malta||Constitutional Court||Uni. of Malta Faculty of Law|
|Maltese court decisions||Sentenzi Online|
|Nauru||Supreme Court||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|New Zealand||Court of Appeal
(other Courts planned from mid-2003)
NZ Privacy Commissioner
|Court of Appeal||Brookers (Thomson Group)|
|Refugee Status Appeals Authority, New Zealand High Court and Court of Appeal (refugee cases only)||RefNZ|
|Nigeria||Supreme Court||Nigeria Law|
|Samoa||High Court, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court, District Court||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|Solomon Islands||High Court, Court of Appeal , Magistrates' Court||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|South Africa||Constitutional Court, Supreme Court of Appeal||WorldLII also WITS Law School|
|Supreme Court of Appeal||University of the Orange Free State|
|Tonga||Supreme Court , Court of Appeal, Land Court||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|Trinidad & Tobago||High Court, Court of Appeals||Judiciary of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago|
|Tuvalu||High Court||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|United Kingdom House of Lords, Privy Council, High Court and Court of Appeal (England & Wales), Northern Ireland Court of Appeal and High Court, Scottish Court of Session, High Court, and Sheriff Court||BAILII/WorldLII|
|House of Lords||United Kingdom Parliament|
|Judicial Committee of the Privy Council||Privacy Council|
|Judgments (various courts, selected)||Court Service (Eng. & Wales)|
|Court Opinions (various courts, selected)||Scottish Courts Website|
|Judgments (various courts, selected)||Northern Ireland Court Service|
|Supreme Court , Court of Appeal, Efate Island Court, Senior Magistrate's Court, Supreme Court of New Hebrides||PacLII/WorldLII also on USP|
|Zambia||Supreme Court , High Court||ZamLII|
|COUNTRY||LAW REFORM ONLINE||LOCATION|
|Australia||Australian Law Reform Commission
NSW LRC (Only 7 reports and 4 Discussion papers)
|Cth (2), ACT LRC (1), NSW LRC (1), QLD LRC (2), TAS LRC (1), VIC (3), WA LRC (1)||Government sites|
|Canada||Canada, Alberta, British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan Law Reform Commissions||Government sites|
|Uniform Law Conference of Canada||Uniform Law Conf. of Canada|
|India||Reports||Law Commission of India|
|Kenya||Reports and papers||Constitution of Kenya Review Commission|
|Malawi||Reports||Malawi Law Commission|
|New Zealand||NZ Law Commission||NZ Law Commission|
|Singapore||Law Reform Committee, Singapore Academy of Law||LawNet|
|Law Reform and Revision Division, A-Gs Chambers||A-Gs Chambers of Singapore|
|South Africa||South African Law Commission||WITS Law School|
|United Kingdom||Law Commission for England and Wales||Law Commission|
|Office of Law Reform for Northern Ireland; Law Reform Advisory Committee for Northern Ireland||Office of Law Reform|
|Scottish Law Commission||Scottish Law Commission|
|Country||Judgment||Other Cth Cases Cited|
|Australia (High Court )||Maurici  HCA 8||1 UK|
|Re Minister for Immigration; Ex parte Lam  HCA 6||7 UK (2 on BAILII); 1 NZ; 2 Canada (Both on CanLII)|
|Bahamas (Supreme Court)||Financial Clearing Corp. v. Attorney General. (27/11/ 01)||1 South Africa; 3 UK (1 on BAILII); 1 Gambia; 1 Trinidad & Tobago; 1 Mauritius|
|Glinton and Esfakis v. Ingraham (307/02)||3 UK (2 on BAILII), 1 NZ, 1 Bermuda, 1 Antigua & Barbuda, 2 Canada (on CanLII)|
|Belize (Supreme Court)||Selgado v A-G et al (18 /12/02)||2 UK|
|Chawla v A-G (29/7/02)||3 UK; 2 Canada; 1 CAOECA; 1 Guyana; 1 Bahamas|
|Canada (Supreme Court)||R. v. Zinck 2003 SCC 6||0|
|Harvard College v Canada 2002 SCC 76||1 UK|
|Fiji (Supreme Court)||In re the Constitution (Misc. Case #1 of 2002)||1 NZ|
|The President v Kubuabola  FJSC 8||1 Australia (on AustLII)|
|India (Supreme Court)||M/s. Cadila Laboratories (6745/99) (13/2/03)||0|
|UPSRTC v Hoti Lal (5984/00) (11/2/03)||8 UK|
|Jamaica (Supreme Court)||Couttes v Barclays Bank (E466/99 )||3 UK|
|Judgment E100 of 2000 Everton George Hyatt v Sharon Jennifer Hyatt||1 UK|
|Kiribati (High Court)||Republic v Timiti  KIHC 1 (1998)||0|
|Republic v Tekanene  KIHC 3 ((1997)||1 UK|
|Malta (Ct of Appeal)||Borg v Debono||0|
|Aic v Pubblici||0|
|NZ (Court of Appeal)||Amaru  NZCA 338||0|
|Lawton  NZCA 337||1 UK|
|Nigeria (Supreme Court)||A-G Abia State (2002) 3 NILR 28||1 UK|
|7-UP Bottling Company (1995) 3 NILR 10||0|
|Samoa (Court of Appeal)||Mulitalo  WSCA||0|
|Teo  WSCA 7||2 UK, 1 Canada, 1 Fiji, 2 NZ, 1 Australia (on AustLII)|
|Solomon Is (C of A)||Air Transport Ltd  SBCA 2||1 UK|
|Prime Minister  SBCA 1||2 UK|
|S. Africa (Sup Ct Appeal)||Golden Fried Chicken  ZASCA 105||0|
|York  ZASCA 104||0|
|Tonga (Court of Appeal)||Tu'i'onetoa  TOCA 1||3 UK|
|Tupou  TOCA 2||0|
|Tuvalu (High Court)||Toafa  TVHC 1||15 UK, 1 Australia|
|Trinidad & Tobago (Ct of Appeal)||Chaitan (Cv.A. Nos. 26 & 29/01)||1 UK|
|Luciano Valley Vue Hotel (Cv.A No. 40/98)||1 UK|
|UK (House of Lords)||Kanaris  UKHL 2||1 Australia|
|Fairchild  UKHL 22||7 Australia, 3 Canada|
|UK (Privy Council)||Singh  UKPC 15||0|
|Patel  UKPC 16||0|
|Vanuatu (Court of Appeal)||Mathias  VUCA 8||0|
|Malsoklei  VUCA 9||0|
Some of the technical developments which would assist WorldLII's growth and quality include:
The main ingredients needed for success are goodwill on the part of data providers, a commitment to free access to the law, and a determination to create a better Commonwealth and common law jurisprudence. Technical and resources questions can usually be solved when these ingredients are present.
In some cases, the inclusion of databases on WorldLII may be the first step toward the development of independent national or regional Legal Information Institutes using the same software as WorldLII, on the model of PacLII, AustLII, CanLII, BAILII or HKLII. The development of WorldLII's South African databases in conjunction with WITS Law School could lead to one example of such as a development. WorldLII could serve as an 'incubator' of other Legal Information Institutes in the Commonwealth.
Achieving WorldLII's goal of facilitating the development of a more international common law will involve overcoming many obstacles. Perhaps Lord Cooke's words (in another context) will be accurate:
"One does not collect jurisdictions like postage stamps, and the possibilities of any increase at all in my own modest collection are by no means evident ..."Will WorldLII and the LII's cooperating in it become 'home' to the law of more Commonwealth countries? As Lord Justice Brooke concluded 'We will have to wait and see'.
Lord Cooke of Thorndon "The Dream of an International Common Law" in C Saunders (Ed) Courts of Final Jurisdiction: The Mason court in Australia, Federation Press 1996
Lord Cooke of Thorndon 'The Judge in an Evolving Society', address to Judges and Judicial Officers of the High Court of Hong Kong, 17 December 1997, available at <http://www.upf.pf/recherche/fichiers%2520RJP4/01Cooke.doc&e=673>
G Greenleaf, P Chung , A Mowbray, Ka Po Chow and KH Pun 'The Hong Kong Legal Information Institute (HKLII): Its role in free access to global law via the Internet  Hong Kong Law Journal Vol 32, Part 1; presented at 4th Law via Internet Conference, Montreal, October 2002, available at <http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/conf2002/actes/greenleaf.html>
G Greenleaf 'Free the Law: How the Australasian Legal Information Institute (AustLII) Achieved the Free Availability of Legal Information on the Internet' 2000 (1). The Journal of Information, Law and Technology (JILT) at <http://www.law.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/00-1/transcript.html>
G Greenleaf, A Mowbray G King `New directions in law via the internet - The AustLII Papers' Journal of Information, Law and Technology (JILT), Issue 2, 1997, University of Warwick Faculty of Law, at <http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/issue/1997_2>
A Mowbray, G Greenleaf and P Chung 'A Uniform Approach for
Vendor and Media Neutral Citation - the Australian Experience' Citations
Workshop: strategies for accessing law and legal information Edinburgh,
Scotland - 11th & 12th March 2000
(c) G Greenleaf, A Mowbray and P Chung 2003. These materials are subject to copyright. No part may be reproduced, adapted or communicated without the written consent of the copyright owner except as permitted under applicable copyright law.[*] Graham Greenleaf is Professor of Law, University of New South Wales; Andrew Mowbray is Professor of Law, University of Technology, Sydney; Philip Chung is Executive Director, AustLII, and Lecturer in Law, , University of Technology, Sydney; the authors are the Co-Directors of the Australasian Legal Information Institute (AustLII) and World Legal Information Institute (WorldLII); Madeleine Davis and Takao Hasuike, Research Officers at AustLII, prepared the Tables in this paper.
 Lord Justice Henry Brooke 'Publishing the Courts: Judgments and public information on the Internet' (paper at this Conference, 2003) describes one motivation for the creation of BAILII as the needs of 'the countries of the Commonwealth particularly in Africa and the Caribbean, which are desperate to obtain access to UK law texts', and the need for quick download of Privy Council decisions when you are in countries with very slow Internet connectivity.
 Lord Cooke of Thorndon "The Dream of an International Common Law" in C Saunders (Ed) Courts of Final Jurisdiction: The Mason court in Australia, Federation Press 1996
 Lord Cooke "The Dream of an International Common Law" op cit
 Lord Cooke of Thorndon 'The Judge in an Evolving Society', address to Judges and Judicial Officers of the High Court of Hong Kong, 17 December 1997, available at <http://www.upf.pf/recherche/fichiers%2520RJP4/01Cooke.doc&e=673>
 As to which, see Lord Cooke "The Dream of an International Common Law" op cit Part I.
 Lord Justice Brooke op cit
 Lord Cooke op cit 1996, Part II
 See Lord Justice Brooke op cit p5 for an explanation of the significance of this case
 Another answer to providing comprehensive access is to have all significant legal websites in a jurisdiction adopt a standard format for their materials, and to return results of distributed searches to a centralised search facility. There are no successful examples of this approach yet known.
 LawNet in the Australian State of New South Wales is one example, but even it lacks the capacity for users to search all of its databases in one search.
 We are not suggesting that LIIs should only provide essential legal information. They are likely to be involved in the provision of other types of secondary materials such as law journals, in the provision of 'plain English' guides to the law and in other approaches to improving public access to the law. These sources require different considerations from 'essential' legal information, particularly because their publication is less likely to be pursuant to a duty to publish, or public subsidies to do so.
 Until recently the 'Australasian' in the title was more a statement of intention than fact.
 HKLII is pronounced 'H K Lee'.
 The Zambian Legal Information Institute (ZamLII) <http://zamlii.zamnet.zm/> (1996) no longer seems to be updated; There is a list of LIIs at <http://www.worldlii.org/catalog/52806.html>.
 See <http://www.juridicas.unam.mx/infjur/leg/> - It is maintained by the Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas (Legal Research Institute) de la UNAM (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México).
 Links to these key government sites, and to LIIs, can be found at <http://www.worldlii.org/catalog/52806.html>.
 See <http://www.worldlii.org/links/2172.html> for a global list.
 See <http://www.worldlii.org/links/2027.html> for a global list.
 See <http://www.worldlii.org/worldlii/declaration/>
 See G Greenleaf, A Mowbray G King `New directions in law via the internet - The AustLII Papers' Journal of Information, Law and Technology (JILT), Issue 2, 1997, University of Warwick Faculty of Law, at <http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/issue/1997_2> , and G Greenleaf 'Free the Law: How the Australasian Legal Information Institute (AustLII) Achieved the Free Availability of Legal Information on the Internet' 2000 (1). The Journal of Information, Law and Technology (JILT) at <http://www.law.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/00-1/transcript.html>.
 The existence of the Hong Kong Legal Information Institute (HKLII - <http://www.hklii.org/> is another demonstration of this.
 See <http://www.justice.gov.hk/index.htm#>.
 It was first demonstrated at the Third Law via Internet Conference, held at AustLII in Sydney in November 2001, and has been available for public access since then.
 See <http://barratry.law.cornell.edu/Summit/index.htm>.
 Tom Bruce 'WORLDLII: A sketch for a distributed search system' at <http://barratry.law.cornell.edu/Summit/worldlii.htm>.
 Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa, and Constitutional Court of South Africa
 WTO Arbitrators Decisions 1998- ; WTO Panel Decisions 1998-; WTO Appellate Body Decisions 1996- <http://www.worldlii.org/hosted_databases.html#int>
 Generic Top Level Domain Name (gTLD) Decisions 2000- <http://www.worldlii.org/int/cases/GENDND
 International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Decisions 1997- <http://www.worldlii.org/int/cases/ITLOS>
 ISIL Year Book of International Humanitarian and Refugee Law <http://www.worldlii.org/int/journals/ISILYBIHRL/>
 For a history of these developments in Australia and elsewhere, see A Mowbray, G Greenleaf and P Chung 'A Uniform Approach for Vendor and Media Neutral Citation - the Australian Experience' Citations Workshop: strategies for accessing law and legal information Edinburgh, Scotland - 11th & 12th March 2000
 See Mowbray, Greenleaf and Chung 'A Uniform Approach for Vendor and Media Neutral Citation - the Australian Experience' op cit Part 8 for discussion of the implementation on BAILII and the original set of designators used.
 Lord Justice Brooke op cit 'Advances in England and Wales in the last five years'
 Practice Direction (Judgments: Form and Citation)  1 WLR 194 available at <http://www.lawreports.co.uk/civjan0.3.htm>
 Practice Direction (Judgments: Neutral Citation)  1 WLR 3 available at <http://www.lawreports.co.uk/othjanb0.1.htm>
 At <http://www.hklii.org/hk/cases/HKCFA/2002/3.html>.
 See, for a detailed description, Graham Greenleaf, Philip Chung and Russell Allen 'World Law: Finding law after Google' Proc. AustLII Law via Internet 2001 Conference, AustLII, Sydney, 2001.
 <http://www.worldlii.org/catalog/54572.html>, as discussed earlier in this paper.
 We apologise for any inadvertent omissions, and if informed of them will amend the tables accordingly before further publication, and will add the databases to the WorldLII Catalog.
 See back to the discussion of WorldLII's existing and proposed databases.
 Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand, South Africa and the United Kingdom. The historically related jurisdictions of the Republic of Ireland and Hong Kong also meet all three criteria.
 Malawi and Kenya
 It is arguable that the Privy Council should be considered as a separate jurisdiction, particularly in light of the surviving rights of appeal to it from some jurisdictions, which may make it more likely that Courts in those jurisdictions will cite its decisions since they are binding on local courts.
 At least half these decisions are by the Privy Council, and need to be noted separately from other UK Courts.
 See G Greenleaf, P Chung , A Mowbray, Ka Po Chow and KH Pun 'The Hong Kong Legal Information Institute (HKLII): Its role in free access to global law via the Internet  Hong Kong Law Journal Vol 32, Part 1 for a discussion of the general issues involved.
 Thanks to funding from the Australian Research Council, as described earlier, AustLII/WorldLII is able to undertake this inclusion of Commonwealth/common law material at present, but long-term continuation or expansion of this will require additional funding from new stakeholders.
 We cannot convert data from paper, it must already be available in some computerised form.
 Lord Cooke, op cit, p2
 Lord Justice Brooke, op cit, final words