这是我们在2017年为澳洲墨尔本大学的学弟学妹们写的范文之一，经得客户同意我们作为sample展示，是一篇澳洲法律论文代写，这篇文章主要是说在新闻工作过程中，记者可能会违反相关法律或道德规范来调查和收集一些有价值的信息。

但是，媒体组织在向公众传播和发布信息方面有自由，特别是在涉及公共利益时。同时讨论了隐私侵权，侵权和诽谤方面潜在的法律风险或违反道德准则的情况。以下是澳洲法律代写的文章展示：

In ABC v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd, the court accepted the possibility of privacy tort. Gummow and Hayne JJ jointly accepted that the decision in the Victoria Park did not prevent from developing a tort of privacy. In Australia, the development of tort of privacy only applies to natural persons. Although a corporation may also suffer economic loss arising from invasion of its privacy, it does not suffer mental distress as that suffered by natural persons. In other words, a tort of privacy as a cause of action may be not available for a corporation to protect its commercial interests. Callinan J apparently argued that corporations may have privacy interests to be protected under the common law. However, Lenah did not have privacy interests to be protected because it was only concerned with its business goodwill or reputation and there was no invasion of privacy.

In the given scenario, Company X’s privacy is invaded when the reporter climbs over the fence and takes photoes. According to the principle in the Lenah case, the company may bring an action against the Express for tort of privacy. However, this does not indicate that this may succeed. The company’s reputation or business goodwill may hence be injured when the publication states its involvement in the scandal. However, this does not relate to its privacy interests and simply is concerned with its reputation. Hence, just like Lenah, Company X cannot rely on tort of privacy to sue against the Express and the journalist due to lack of invasion of privacy.

除此之外，我们还介绍了一种情况，就是媒体组织和记者可能因普通法的隐私侵犯而被起诉。侵入是其中一种隐私侵权行为。要建立非法侵入，必须满足一些要素。索赔人必须拥有土地专有权才能获得起诉权，并且进行了下列分析。

Media organisations and journalists may be sued for invasion in privacy in the common law. Trespass is one of kinds of privacy torts. To establish trespass, some elements must be satisfied. The claimant must have exclusive possession of the land to obtain the right to sue. The occupation of a land under contractual or licence does not necessarily produce the right to sue under trepass tort. Then, the defendant has not obtained consent or authorisation to enter a private premises. When fences exist and warns such as ‘trespassers will be prosecuted’ are posted, no permission to enter a property is allowed. Second, the claimant needs not to prove damages suffered. Third, the defendant must be at fault. Namely, the defendant trespasses the property or premises without consent or implied license. Finally, the defendant must intentionally directly inferfere in the property. Indirect interference may constitute nuisance When trespass is proven, courts may award damages to the claimant and grant injunctions to stop media from using or publishing any material taken from trespassing.

In the given scenario, the first legal risk is trespass. Company X owns the factory and has exclusive possession of right to the premises. It has the right to sue any person trespassing the land. Obviously, the reporter does not obtain consent or authorisation while entering the factory. She is refused by the security guard and enters the premises by climing over the fence. The fence indicates that the factory owner regards the premises as a private place and rejects entrance without permission. Furthermore, the reporter enters the premises intentionally and directly. The climbing over the defence and taking photoes are intentional direct interference with the land. The reporter may prove the entrance under the consent or authorisation. However, on facts, this seems difficult. It is likely that the trespass tort may be established.

文章的结尾conclusion再次总结，首先表明快递可能会受到侵犯隐私权，侵入土地和诽谤等行为的影响。 同时提到媒体可能会以某种方式为自己辩护。

并声明对于隐私侵权，媒体可能不承担侵犯隐私权的义务。对于非法侵入，公共利益可以用来捍卫媒体的行为。

Briefly concluded, the Express may be subject to such causes of action as tort of privacy, trespass to land, and defamation. However, the media may defend itself in some ways. For tort of privacy, the media may not hold liability for invasion of privacy for Company X’s privacy interests no t being involved. For trespass, public interest can be used to defend the media’s conduct. The reporter’s decision to trespass is to avoid or reduce substantial harm to the community. For defamation, truth, qualified privilege and honest opinions are effective defences for the media.

这篇文章采用的是footnotes格式，reference就不放上去了，需要澳洲法律论文代写的小伙伴可以随时联系我们。