The study of Roman law has experienced a gradual decline within legal academia, particularly in English universities, as some contend that examining a legal system from over 1,200 years ago lacks relevance to contemporary legal frameworks. However, this perspective overlooks the enduring significance of Roman law in elucidating foundational concepts such as contract, delict and property within the English legal system. Australian law, closely linked to English law, is similarly influenced by Roman legal principles. Despite this connection, scholarship on Roman law within Australian legal academia remains limited, with many universities relying primarily on textbooks authored by British scholars. Justice Emmett KC’s publication addresses this academic gap and contributes to the development of Roman law studies among Australian scholars.

E.’s interdisciplinary background in Classics and law is clearly reflected in the book, which astutely examines the trajectory of Roman law in a continent that Justinian could scarcely have envisioned as a locus for the continuation of his legal maxims. Across 494 pages E. provides a comprehensive account of the influence of Roman law in Australia and the manner in which the judiciary continues to apply Roman legal principles. Moreover, E.’s lucid style, combined with his extensive knowledge of the historical foundations of Roman law and its sources, particularly in the first three chapters, provides an accessible entry point for readers less familiar with the corpus of law dating back to Justinian and earlier periods.

The distinctiveness of this book lies in E.’s approach to assessing the continued validity of Roman legal principles in shaping modern civil law concepts. For instance, E. explains the Roman law distinction within the category of public property, which was divided into three classes: things belonging to all (res communes), things belonging to the state (res publicae) and things belonging to a local civic body. He then highlights how these principles resonate within Australian jurisprudence, particularly in judicial reasoning concerning flowing water as common property. He substantiates this argument by referring to a 2009 judgment of the High Court of Australia, which affirmed that the common law position regarding flowing water reflects the Roman doctrine of publici iuris: no individual owns the water, but rather enjoys a usufructuary right while it flows.

It is no exaggeration to state that E.’s work is a pleasure to read, not only for Classicists but also for readers interested in understanding the ancient foundations of civil law. Notwithstanding its considerable merits, the book is not without minor shortcomings. For instance, E. appears to understate the extent to which classical traditions permeated education in Australia under British influence and thereby shaped legal thought, contributing to saving Roman law from total eclipse. Nevertheless, this minor limitation should not discourage readers from engaging with this compelling work.