It is widely accepted that tort law operates according to a hierarchy of protected interests. Some commentators suggest that this hierarchy can be put to dispositive uses in cases characterised by a clash of interests held respectively by the claimant and defendant (the inferior interest giving way). Others argue that thinking in terms of a hierarchy of interests sheds light on three unusual aspects of tort law: viz. the existence of torts that are actionable per se, the existence of strict liability torts, and the existence of actions in which injunctive relief is routinely awarded even though compensatory damages are tort law's default remedy. This article tests both claims. It concludes that an intuitively appealing hierarchy of interests can be identified, and that it might well possess dispositive significance all other things being equal. But it also observes that all other things are seldom equal, and that departures from the hierarchy occur for various reasons that can be clearly identified and which should be borne in mind when thinking about its dispositive utility. It also urges caution in making connections between the status of certain interests and the fact that they are protected by torts that are actionable per se, strict liability torts and torts in connection with which injunctions are awarded almost as a matter of course.

Lithium is a gold standard maintenance treatment in bipolar affective disorder. It has a narrow therapeutic range, and at higher serum lithium levels there is a risk of adverse effects and toxicity. There are three patterns of lithium intoxication: acute, acute-on-chronic and chronic. We describe risk factors for lithium intoxication, mechanisms of toxicity and clinical symptoms seen in lithium intoxication. We describe both the acute and chronic effects of lithium toxicity. Lithium intoxication may be life-threatening and associated with longer-term sequelae. The management of lithium intoxication involves determining the type of intoxication. We discuss treatment strategies aimed at reducing absorption and increasing elimination of lithium. We discuss clinical indications for extracorporeal methods such as dialysis, which are used to limit the time and degree of exposure of the central nervous system to toxic lithium concentrations. Haemodialysis is the most rapid method of eliminating lithium from the body, but careful monitoring is required. Preventive strategies to mitigate the risk for lithium intoxication are discussed.

To assess the burden of respiratory virus coinfections with severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), this study reviewed 4,818 specimens positive for SARS-CoV-2 and tested using respiratory virus multiplex testing. Coinfections with SARS-CoV-2 were uncommon (2.8%), with enterovirus or rhinovirus as the most prevalent target (88.1%). Respiratory virus coinfection with SARS-CoV-2 remains low 1 year into the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Two introduced carnivores, the European red fox Vulpes vulpes and domestic cat Felis catus, have had extensive impacts on Australian biodiversity. In this study, we collate information on consumption of Australian birds by the fox, paralleling a recent study reporting on birds consumed by cats. We found records of consumption by foxes on 128 native bird species (18% of the non-vagrant bird fauna and 25% of those species within the fox’s range), a smaller tally than for cats (343 species, including 297 within the fox’s Australian range, a subset of that of the cat). Most (81%) bird species eaten by foxes are also eaten by cats, suggesting that predation impacts are compounded. As with consumption by cats, birds that nest or forage on the ground are most likely to be consumed by foxes. However, there is also some partitioning, with records of consumption by foxes but not cats for 25 bird species, indicating that impacts of the two predators may also be complementary. Bird species ≥3.4 kg were more likely to be eaten by foxes, and those <3.4 kg by cats. Our compilation provides an inventory and describes characteristics of Australian bird species known to be consumed by foxes, but we acknowledge that records of predation do not imply population-level impacts. Nonetheless, there is sufficient information from other studies to demonstrate that fox predation has significant impacts on the population viability of some Australian birds, especially larger birds, and those that nest or forage on the ground.