![]() |
[Home]
[Databases]
[WorldLII]
[Search]
[Feedback]
High Court of Australia Bulletins |
![]() |
[Database Search] [Name Search] [Recent Bulletins] [Noteup] [Download] [Context] [No Context] [Help]
Last Updated: 29 June 2009
HIGH COURT BULLETIN
Produced by the High Court of Australia Library
[2009] HCAB 5 (26 June 2009)
A record of recent High Court of
Australia cases: decided, reserved for judgment, awaiting hearing in the
Court’s original jurisdiction, granted special leave to appeal, and
refused special leave to appeal.
The following cases were handed down by the High Court of Australia during the May–June 2009 sittings.
Spriggs v Commissioner of Taxation; Riddell v Commissioner of Taxation
High Court of
Australia: [2009] HCA
22.
Judgment delivered:
18 June 2009.
Coram:
French CJ, Gummow, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Taxes and duties — Income tax — Deductions
— Appellant taxpayers professional Australian Rules football player and
professional rugby league player — Each paid fee to manager for
negotiating contract to play with new club — Whether management fee
deductible under Income Tax Assessment
Act 1997 (Cth), s 8-1(1) as outgoing “incurred in gaining or
producing” or “necessarily incurred in carrying on a business for
the purpose of gaining or producing” assessable income — Whether
each appellant carrying on business exploiting sporting prowess and associated
celebrity — Relevance of exclusion from definition of
“business” in s 995-1 of “occupation as an employee”
— Relevance of Federal Commissioner of
Taxation v Maddalena (1971) 45 ALJR 426; 2 ATR 541.
Taxes and
duties — Income tax — Deductions — Whether management fee not
deductible pursuant to s 8-1(2)(a) as an “outgoing of capital, or of a
capital nature”.
Words and phrases — “business”,
“incurred in gaining or producing”, “necessarily incurred in
carrying on a business”, “occupation as an employee”,
“ordinary income”, “outgoing of capital”.
Appealed from FCA
FC: [2008] FCAFC 150; (2008) 170 FCR 135.
The following cases have been reserved for judgment by the High Court of Australia.
**** Indicates cases reserved for judgment since High Court Bulletin 4 [2009] HCAB 4.
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZIZO & Ors
S568/2008: [2009] HCATrans
71.
Date heard:
23 April 2009 — Judgment
reserved.
Coram: French
CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Crennan and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Administrative law — Jurisdictional error —
Procedural fairness — Invitation to attend hearing addressed and sent to
Appellant but not authorised recipient — Appellant and authorised
recipient living at same address — Appellant subsequently attending
hearing and calling witnesses — Whether breach of statutory procedural
requirement to notify authorised recipient constitutes jurisdictional error
— Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s
441G.
Administrative law — Discretionary relief — Procedural
fairness — Whether no practical unfairness followed from breach of
statutory procedural requirement — Whether absence of practical unfairness
is a matter that should be considered when determining whether or not to refuse
relief on discretionary grounds.
Appealed from FCA
FC: [2008] FCAFC 122; (2008) 172 FCR 152; (2008) 102 ALD 541.
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZLFX & Anor; Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZKTI & Anor
S503/2008; S515/2008:
[2009]
HCATrans 102.
Date heard:
19 May 2009 — Judgment
reserved.
Coram: French
CJ, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Administrative law — Jurisdictional error — Refugee Review Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) sought information from a person by telephone — Section 424(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (“the Act”) authorises the Tribunal to get any information it considers relevant, and s 424(2) authorises the Tribunal to invite a person to give “additional information” — Sections 424(3) and 424B of the Act set out formal requirements for invitation — Whether all requests by the Tribunal for information on a voluntary basis fall within s 424(2) of the Act — Whether failure to comply with ss 424(2), 424(3) and 424B of the Act amounts to jurisdictional error — Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 424(1), 424(2), 424(3), 424B.
Appealed from FCA
FC: [2008] FCAFC 125.
Bankruptcy
Vale v Sutherland
S38/2009: [2009] HCATrans
104; [2009] HCATrans
105.
Date heard:
20–21 May 2009 — Parties to
file further submissions before Court makes a determination on the course this
matter will take.
Coram:
Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan and Kiefel
JJ.
Catchwords:
Bankruptcy — Notice — Notice issued under s
139ZQ of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth)
(“the Act”) asserting certain property transactions were void under
s 120 of the Act — Notice asserted market value of properties at time of
transfer — Failure to comply with notice may result in criminal sanctions
under s 139ZT of the Act — Whether notice should be set aside under ss 30
and/or 139ZS if value stated incorrect.
Bankruptcy — Notice —
Whether value in s 139ZQ of the Act is value at the time of transfer or at the
time of issue of notice.
Practice and Procedure — Pleadings —
Whether correctness of value traversed in defence or cross-claim — Effect
of failure to traverse where trial conducted on the basis that the correctness
of value was in issue.
Appealed from FCA
FC: [2008] FCAFC 148; (2008) 170 FCR 112.
Constitutional Law
****Bakewell v The Queen
D5/2009: [2009] HCATrans
133.
Date heard:
16 June 2009 — Court to consider
the matter and re-list at a future date either for judgment or for further
argument.
Coram: French
CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Constitutional law — Chapter III — Kable doctrine — Section 19(3) of the Sentencing (Crime of Murder) and Parole Reform Act 2003 (NT) (“the Act”) permits the NT Director of Public Prosecutions (“the DPP”) to apply to the Supreme Court of NT (“the Court”) to extend the non-parole period of a prisoner — The Court must fix a non-parole period of 25 years if in relation to the crime of murder any of the listed aggravating circumstances were applicable — The DPP’s application under s 19(3) of the Act in relation to the Appellant was dismissed — Sections 19(6)–19(10) were inserted by the Sentencing (Crime of Murder) and Parole Reform Amendment Act 2008 (NT) as a result of application’s dismissal — The Court’s power to dismiss the DPP’s application if an aggravating circumstance established is “excluded”: s 19(7) — DPP permitted to make a further application if, “before the commencement of this subsection, an application under this section had been dismissed”: s 19(9) — Appellant was only prisoner to which s 19(9) could apply — Whether ss 19(7) and 19(9) are incompatible with or repugnant to the exercise by the Court of the judicial power of the Commonwealth invested by Ch III of the Constitution — Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (1996) 189 CLR 51 — Baker v The Queen (2004) 223 CLR 513.
Appealed from NT
SC: [2008] NTSC 51.
Clarke v Commissioner of Taxation & Anor
A35/2008: [2009] HCATrans
41; [2009] HCATrans
42; [2009] HCATrans
43.
Date heard:
10–12 March 2009 — Judgment
reserved.
Coram: French
CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Kiefel and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Constitutional law — Intergovernmental immunities — Melbourne Corporation doctrine — Superannuation scheme — State of South Australia amended legislation concerning commutation of superannuation for State parliamentarians to address financial implications brought about by Commonwealth taxation legislation — Whether Commonwealth legislation amounts to an impermissible interference with the capacity of States to function as governments — Whether State required to show it was “compelled” to change legislation — Application of Austin v Commonwealth (2003) 215 CLR 185 — Melbourne Corporation v Commonwealth (1947) 74 CLR 31.
Appealed from FCA
FC: [2008] FCAFC 106; (2008) 170 FCR 473; (2008) 69 ATR 724.
International Finance Trust Company Ltd & Anor v New South Wales Crime Commission & Ors
S72/2009: [2009] HCATrans
107; [2009] HCATrans
108.
Date heard:
26–27 May 2009 — Judgment
reserved.
Coram: French
CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Constitutional law — Chapter III — Kable doctrine — Section 10(2) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990 (NSW) (“the Act”) permits the NSW Crime Commission to apply to the NSW Supreme Court (“the Court”) ex parte for a restraining order in respect of “property of a person suspected of having engaged in a serious crime related activity” — Under s 10(3), the Court “must make the order applied for” if supported by an affidavit of an authorised officer stating that the officer “suspects that the person has engaged in a serious crime related activity” and “the Court considers that having regard to the matters contained in any such affidavit there are reasonable grounds for any such suspicion” — Section 22 requires the Court, upon application by the NSW Crime Commission, to make an assets forfeiture order if the Court finds it to be more probable than not that the person has engaged in a “serious crime related activity” — Ex parte restraining orders were made with respect to numerous bank accounts — Whether s 10(3) directs the Court as to the manner and outcome of the exercise of its jurisdiction — Whether s 10(3) is invalid as being an ancillary component to a statutory scheme involving the forfeiture of property in circumstances where there has not been a criminal finding of guilt — Whether s 10(3) is incompatible with or repugnant to the exercise by the Court of the judicial power of the Commonwealth invested by Ch III of the Constitution — Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (1996) 189 CLR 51.
Appealed from NSW SC
(CA): [2008] NSWCA 291; (2008) 251 ALR 479.
Lane v Morrison & Anor
C3/2008: [2009] HCATrans
69; [2009] HCATrans
70.
Date heard:
22–23 April 2009 — Judgment
reserved.
Coram: French
CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Constitutional law — Military courts — Command
of naval and military forces — Independence from — Plaintiff, a
member of the Australian Defence Force (“the ADF”), was charged
under ss 25 and 61(3) of the Defence
Force Discipline Act 1982 (Cth) (“the Act”) for assaulting a
superior officer and for an indecent act — Charges were listed for hearing
before the Australian Military Court (“the AMC”) established by
s 114 of the Act — Whether the AMC’s independence from the
command structures within the ADF is inconsistent with s 68 of the
Constitution.
Constitutional law
— Military courts — Chapter III — Whether the AMC is a
“federal court” impermissibly created contrary to s 71 of the
Constitution — Whether a general
criminal jurisdiction is conferred by the Act on the AMC which is not
subordinate and supplementary to the general criminal law — Whether a
general criminal jurisdiction can only be validly conferred on a Ch III
court.
Constitutional law — Military courts — Defence power
— Whether the conferral of a general criminal jurisdiction on the AMC is
beyond the scope of s 51(vi) of the
Constitution.
This matter was brought in the original jurisdiction of
the High Court.
Pape v Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia
S35/2009: [2009] HCATrans
59
; [2009] HCATrans
60; [2009] HCATrans
61.
Date heard:
30–31 March, 1 April 2009 —
Orders made 3 April 2009 dismissing the
application. Written reasons of the Court to be published at a future
date.
Coram: French CJ,
Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Constitutional law — Taxation power — Gifts
— Section 7 of the Tax Bonus for Working
Australians Act (No 2) 2009 (Cth) (“the Act”) provides that
the Commissioner of Taxation must pay a tax bonus to entitled persons —
Persons are entitled under s 5 of the Act if, inter alia, they: are an
individual; are an Australian resident; have an adjusted tax liability greater
than nil in the 2007–08 income tax year; and have a taxable income not
exceeding $100 000 for the 2007–08 income tax year — Whether the tax
bonus is a gift — Whether the Act is not a law with respect to taxation
— Constitution, s
51(ii).
Constitutional law — Appropriations — Whether ss 81
and 83 of the Constitution vest a
legislative power in the Commonwealth to make
appropriations.
Constitutional law — Appropriations — Whether
the tax bonus is an appropriation “for the purposes of the
Commonwealth” —
Constitution, ss 81, 83.
This matter was brought in the original jurisdiction of
the High Court.
Contracts
Campbell & Anor v Backoffice Investments Pty Ltd & Anor
S435/2008: [2009] HCATrans
5; [2009] HCATrans
6.
Date heard:
3–4 February 2009 —
Judgment
reserved.
Coram: French
CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon and Kiefel
JJ.
Catchwords:
Contracts — Misleading and deceptive conduct — Reliance — Pre-contractual representations — Share purchase agreement containing narrowly drafted warranties and entire agreement clause — Vendor made incorrect pre-contractual representations regarding the company’s finances — Representations overlapped with information subject to contractual warranties — Whether purchaser relied on representations — Whether conduct amounted to misleading and deceptive conduct under Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW), s 42 — Whether remedy amounting to setting aside sale agreement appropriate.
Appealed from NSW
CA: [2008] NSWCA 95; (2008) 66 ACSR 359; (2008) 26 ACLC 537.
Courts and Judicial System
See Practice and Procedure: AON Risk Services Australia Ltd v Australian National University.
Employment Law
Visscher v The Honourable President Justice Giudice, The Honourable Senior Deputy President Drake, Commissioner Roberts, Commissioner Redmond, Australian Industrial Relations Commission & Anor
S30/2008: [2009] HCATrans
106.
Date heard:
22 May 2009 — Judgment
reserved.
Coram: Gummow,
Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Employment law — Wrongful termination — Employer repudiated employment contract — Ongoing employment relationship after repudiation — Whether “unaccepted” repudiation was effective to terminate the contract — Whether a new contract of employment was brought into existence.
Appealed from FCA
FC: [2007] FCAFC 206; (2007) 170 IR 419.
Immigration
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZJGV & Anor; Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZJXO & Anor
S577/2008; S578/2008:
[2009]
HCATrans 103.
Date heard: 5
December2008 — Judgment
reserved.
Coram: French
CJ, Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Immigration — Section 91R(3) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) provides that a decision-maker shall “disregard any conduct engaged in by the person in Australia” in determining whether that person has a well-founded fear of persecution — Whether conduct must be completely disregarded — Whether conduct can be used to assess credibility of conduct engaged in before arriving in Australia.
Appealed from FCA
FC: [2008] FCAFC 105; (2008) 170 FCR 515; (2008) 247 ALR 451; (2008) 102
ALD 226.
Practice and Procedure
AON Risk Services Australia Ltd v Australian National University
C1/2009: [2009] HCATrans
72; [2009] HCATrans
74.
Date heard:
28–29 April 2009 — Judgment
reserved.
Coram: French
CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Practice and procedure — Pleadings —
Application for leave to amend — Prejudice — Leave to amend sought
after commencement of trial — Whether opponent must demonstrate specific
prejudice caused by the amendments that cannot be met by a costs order —
Application of Queensland v J L Holdings Pty
Ltd (1997) 189 CLR 146 (“J L
Holdings”) — Whether J L
Holdings has been properly interpreted — Court Procedure Rules 2006
(ACT), r 21.
Practice and procedure — Pleadings — Application
for leave to amend — Prejudice — Respondent made deliberate tactical
decision to exclude an issue from proceedings — Whether right to amendment
to reverse deliberate forensic decision.
Practice and procedure —
Pleadings — Application for leave to amend — Discretion to grant
— Whether party is required to offer explanation when seeking to amend
pleadings — Application of J L
Holdings.
Courts and judicial system — Abuse of process
— Respondent seeks to maintain claims directly inconsistent with the
consent judgment obtained against insurer defendant — Whether amendment to
include inconsistent claim would amount to an abuse of process.
Appealed from ACT SC
(CA): [2008] ACTCA 13.
See also Bankruptcy: Vale v Sutherland.
Taxes and Duties
****Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue; Commissioner of Territory Revenue v Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd
D7/2009; D6/2009: [2009] HCATrans
150.
Date heard:
23 June 2009 — Judgment reserved
on the first appeal (the option to renew issue) with hearing of the second
appeal (the goodwill issue) to be heard at a future
date.
Coram: French CJ,
Hayne, Heydon, Crennan and Kiefel
JJ.
Catchwords:
Taxes and duties — Stamp duty — Definition of
“land” — Appellant acquired a corporation holding mining
leases over land made under an enactment — All but two leases included a
right of renewal — Stamp duty payable if “the value of all land to
which the corporation is entitled ... is 60% or more of the value of all
property to which it is entitled”:
Taxation (Administration) Act 1978 (NT)
(“the Act”), s 56N(2)(b) — Section 4 of the Act, labelled
“Interpretation”, defines “land” to include a
“lease” of land and defines “lease” to include a
“lease granted under an Act” but not “an option to renew a
lease” — Whether the definitions of “land” and
“lease” in s 4 of the Act do not apply to s 56N(2)(b) due to a
contrary intention.
Taxes and duties — Income taxation —
Goodwill — Nature and sources — Attraction of custom — Mining
corporation — Whether attraction of custom essential element of goodwill
— Whether profitable business necessarily has goodwill for legal purposes
— Federal Commissioner of Taxation v
Murry (1998) 193 CLR 605.
Appealed from NT SC
(CA): [2008] NTCA 14; (2008) 156 NTR 1.
Torts
****ACQ Pty Ltd v Cook & Anor; Aircair Moree Pty Ltd v Cook & Anor
S107/2009; S108/2009:
[2009]
HCATrans 134.
Date heard:
17 June 2009 — Judgment
reserved.
Coram: French
CJ, Gummow, Heydon, Crennan and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Torts — Negligence — Causation —
Statutory modification — Crop dusting aircraft struck an electrical power
pole, causing an electrical wire conductor to sag to 1.5m above the ground
— Conductor lay over a muddy field planted with rows of cotton plants
between irrigation ditches — Two electrical linesmen were dispatched to
fix the conductor — While the conductor was still live, one linesman
approached the conductor, and tripped or fell to within 60mm of the conductor,
causing “flashover” (an unintended electric arc between a conductor
and another object) — Whether injury was “caused by ... something
that is a result of an impact” with an aircraft that is in flight:
Damage by Aircraft Act 1999 (Cth), s
10(1)(d).
Torts — Negligence — Duty of care — Scope of
— Whether pilot of crop-dusting aircraft owed a duty of care to electrical
linesman — Whether linesman was a “rescuer” for the purposes
of assessing duty of care.
Appealed from NSW SC
(CA): [2008] NSWCA 161.
Calliden Insurance Ltd v Fox & Ors; Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd v Fox & Ors
(This matter was previously listed as
Downview Pty Ltd v Fox & Ors; Leighton
Contractors Pty Ltd v Fox &
Ors)
S534/2008; S528/2008: [2009] HCATrans
110.
Date heard:
28 May 2009 — Judgment
reserved.
Coram: French
CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Torts — Negligence — Duty of care — Duty of principal contractor to maintain safe workplace — Duty to ensure safety of subcontractors — Whether duty of care owed to independent contractor by a party who is neither his principal nor in any contractual relationship with him — Extent of duty of care to ensure or verify proper training before entering construction site — Whether duty of care defined by contractual obligations.
Appealed from NSW
CA: [2008] NSWCA 23; (2008) Aust Torts Reports ¶81-937; (2008) 170
IR 433; [2008] ALMD 5154, [2008] ALMD 5153.
****Sydney Water Corporation v Turano & Anor
S104/2009: [2009] HCATrans
135.
Date heard:
18 June 2009 — Judgment
reserved.
Coram: French
CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Crennan and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Torts — Negligence — Duty of care — Appellant (a utility company) laid a water main in 1981 which had the alleged effect of altering sub-surface water flows — In 2001 a tree blown over in a storm fell onto a car killing the Respondent’s husband — Tree was in weakened condition because water had carried a pathogen to its roots — Respondent sued Appellant claiming damages — Whether Appellant owed a duty of care to Respondent’s husband — Whether injury was reasonably foreseeable — Whether Appellant caused injury of Respondent’s husband.
Appealed from NSW SC
(CA): [2008] NSWCA 270; (2008) 164 LGERA 16; (2008) 51 MVR
262.
Workers’ Compensation
****Fellowes v Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission
B8/2009: [2009] HCATrans
148; [2009] HCATrans
149.
Date heard:
22–23 June 2009 — Judgment
reserved.
Coram: Hayne,
Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell
JJ.
Catchwords:
Workers’ compensation — Construction of provisions of Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) (“the Act”) — Interpretation of “Guide to the Assessment of the Degree of Permanent Impairment” (“the Guide”) made under s 28 of the Act — Employee suffered work-related injury to left knee and separately on a later occasion to right knee — Whether employee entitled to compensation in respect of impairment resulting from second injury — Effect of the Guide when determining degree of permanent impairment resulting from injury — Consideration of Canute v Comcare (2006) 226 CLR 535.
Appealed from FCA
FC: [2008] FCAFC 140; (2008) 170 FCR 531; (2008) 103 ALD 552.
The following cases are ready for hearing in the original jurisdiction of the High Court of Australia.
**** Indicates cases made ready for hearing since High Court Bulletin 4 [2009] HCAB 4.
****ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd & Ors v The Commonwealth of Australia & Ors
S24/2009.
Catchwords:
Constitutional law — Acquisition of property — Intergovernmental agreements — Pursuant to s 5 of the Natural Resources Management (Financial Assistance) Act 1992 (Cth) (“the Act”) Commonwealth entered a funding agreement with New South Wales whereby Commonwealth provided financial assistance for New South Wales water management projects — Under the funding agreement, New South Wales substituted or converted plaintiffs’ water licences in order to achieve long-term sustainable water use, resulting in reduced water entitlements — Whether substitution and conversion by New South Wales pursuant to the funding agreement involves an acquisition of property to which s 51(xxxi) of the Constitution applies — Whether s 5 of the Act invalid as it authorises Commonwealth to enter into an intergovernmental agreement in breach of s 51(xxxi).
This matter was brought in the original jurisdiction of
the High Court.
The following cases have been granted special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia.
**** Indicates cases granted special leave to appeal since High Court Bulletin 4 [2009] HCAB 4.
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZIAI & Anor
S458/2008: [2009] HCATrans
28.
Date heard:
13 February 2009 — Special leave
granted.
Catchwords:
Administrative law — Jurisdictional error — Wednesbury unreasonableness — Duty to inquire — Extent of — Certificates submitted by person applying for a protection visa alleged to be “fake & forged” — Refugee Review Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) invited person to respond to allegation but failed to make any further inquiries as to veracity of allegation — Whether the Tribunal is under a duty to inquire — Whether the Tribunal failed to meet its duty to inquire — Whether the Tribunal’s error is a jurisdictional error.
Appealed from FCA:
[2008] FCA 1372; (2008) 104 ALD 22.
See also Statutes: Kirk & Anor v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales & Anor; Kirk Group Holdings Ltd & Anor v Workcover Authority of New South Wales (Inspector Childs); Kirk Group Holdings Ltd & Anor v Workcover Authority of New South Wales (Inspector Childs).
Constitutional Law
Arnold & Ors v Minister Administering the Water Management Act 2000 & Ors
S6/2009: [2009] HCATrans
91.
Date heard: 1
May 2009 — Special leave
granted.
Catchwords:
Constitutional law — Grants power — Limits of
— State acquisition of property — Whether Commonwealth legislative
power under s 96 of the Constitution
extends to grants authorised pursuant to an agreement requiring a State to
acquire property on unjust terms —
Constitution, ss 51(xxxi),
96.
Constitutional law — Abridgment of rights to use of water
— Commonwealth “shall not, by any law or regulation of trade or
commerce, abridge the right of a State or of the residents therein to the
reasonable use of the waters of rivers for conservation or irrigation”:
Constitution, s 100 — Whether
prohibition in s 100 is limited to laws made under s 51(i) (“interstate
trade and commerce”) — Whether
Morgan v Commonwealth (1947) 74 CLR 421
should be reconsidered —
Constitution, ss 51(i), 100.
Appealed from NSW SC
(CA): [2008] NSWCA 338; (2008) 163 LGERA 429; (2008) 253 ALR
173.
Contracts
Integral Home Loans Pty Ltd & Anor v Interstar Wholesale Financial Pty Ltd & Anor
S572/2008: [2009] HCATrans
87.
Date heard: 1
May 2009 — Special leave
granted.
Catchwords:
Contracts — Law of penalties — Termination clause — Contract between Appellants (loan originators) and Respondents (finance companies) — Appellants provided loan origination and management services to Respondent in return for upfront commission and ongoing trail commissions — Respondents could terminate contract where Respondents considered in its reasonable opinion that Appellants had engaged in deceptive or fraudulent conduct in relation to a loan — Contract contained specific obligation on Applicant to act honestly and not engage in misleading, deceptive or unethical conduct — Whether termination clause void as a penalty — Whether law of penalties applicable where divestment or forfeiture of rights or property occurs when contract terminated pursuant to a right to do so.
Appealed from NSW SC
(CA): [2008] NSWCA 310.
Corporations Law
Ansell Ltd & Ors v Davies & Ors
A19/2008: [2008] HCATrans
373.
Date heard:
13 November 2008 — Special leave
granted.
Catchwords:
Corporations — Winding up — Voidable transactions — Liquidator’s application for extension of time to pursue creditors — Where extension sought against unidentified creditors — Whether application validly made — Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 588FF(3).
Appealed from SA
SC: [2008] SASC 203; (2008) 219 FLR 329; (2008) 67 ACSR 356.
Courts and Judicial System
See Statutes: Kirk & Anor v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales & Anor; Kirk Group Holdings Ltd & Anor v Workcover Authority of New South Wales (Inspector Childs); Kirk Group Holdings Ltd & Anor v Workcover Authority of New South Wales (Inspector Childs).
Criminal Law
****The Queen v LK; The Queen v RK
S17/2009; S18/2009: [2009] HCATrans
146.
Date heard:
19 June 2009 — Special leave
granted.
Catchwords:
Criminal law — Conspiracy — Fault element — Respondents charged with conspiring to deal with money reckless as to the fact that the money was the proceeds of crime — Section 11.5(2)(b) of the Criminal Code (Cth) provides that for a person to be guilty of the offence of conspiracy, inter alia, ‘the person and at least one other party to the agreement must have intended that an offence would be committed pursuant to the agreement’ — The offence the subject of the conspiracy (dealing with proceeds of crime) provides that a person is guilty of an offence if, inter alia, ‘the person is reckless as to the fact that the money or property is proceeds of crime’: s 400.3(2)(c) — Whether the fault element for the offence of conspiracy for each physical element of the substantive offence is intent or recklessness — Whether s 11.5(2)(b) elevates the fault element to intention despite the fault element in s 400.3(2)(c).
Appealed from NSW SC
CCA: [2008] NSWCCA 338.
****Taiapa v The Queen
B6/2009: [2009] HCATrans
155.
Date heard:
25 June 2009 — Referred to Full
Court.
Catchwords:
Criminal law — Defences — Duress — Police intercepted a car carrying Applicant that contained a dangerous drug — Applicant charged with, inter alia, trafficking in and possession of a dangerous drug — Applicant claimed he was transporting the drug for two persons to whom he owed money — Lenders had threatened Applicant and his family on several occasions with a gun — Applicant claimed he could not go to police because he knew few personal details about the lenders and feared for his family’s safety — Whether defence of duress available — Whether Applicant “reasonably believe[d] he or she or the other person [was] unable otherwise to escape the carrying out of the threat”: Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld), s 31(1)(d)(ii) — Whether s 31(1)(d)(ii) contains objective limitations on the availability of the defence — Whether the existence of such limitations is a matter solely for consideration of the jury.
Appealed from Qld SC
CA: [2008] QCA 204.
Equity
****Bofinger & Anor v Kingsway Group Ltd formerly Willis & Bowring Mortgage Investments Ltd & Ors
S5/2009: [2009] HCATrans
144.
Date heard:
19 June 2009 — Special leave
granted.
Catchwords:
Equity — Subrogation — Unconscionability
— Applicants were guarantors of three separate loans made to a developer
— Guarantees were secured by mortgages over the Applicants’ personal
properties to the three mortgagees — Applicants voluntarily sold personal
properties and used proceeds to reduce first mortgage — Second and third
mortgagees discharged mortgages, allowing sale to be completed even though they
received no part of the proceeds — First mortgagee exercised power of sale
over developer’s land — Surplus remained after first mortgagee paid
out in full — Whether equitable doctrine of unconscionability prevents
guarantors from being subrogated to the rights of the first mortgagee where
subsequent mortgagees remain unpaid and guarantors have given guarantees to
subsequent mortgagees.
Equity — Subrogation — Whether a
guarantor’s equitable right of subrogation to a first mortgagee is
released or surrendered by guarantors’ conduct of providing a guarantee to
subsequent mortgagees.
Mortgages — Rule in
Otter v Lord Vaux (1856) 1 K&J 650;
69 ER 943 prevents a mortgagor who has paid off the first mortgage from keeping
it alive against a later mortgage that he/she has created — Whether rule
can be extended to prevent a guarantor who pays off a mortgage he/she has
guaranteed from being subrogated to the rights of that mortgagee in priority to
a later mortgagee he/she has also guaranteed.
Appealed from NSW SC
CA: [2008] NSWCA 332.
Mortgages
See Equity: ****Bofinger & Anor v Kingsway Group Ltd formerly Willis & Bowring Mortgage Investments Ltd & Ors.
Practice and Procedure
****Jeffery & Katauskas Pty Ltd v SST Consulting Pty Ltd & Ors; Jeffery & Katauskas Pty Ltd v Rickard Constructions Pty Ltd (Subject to Deed of Company Arrangement) & Ors
S14/2009; S16/2009: [2009] HCATrans
140.
Date heard:
19 June 2009 — Special leave
granted.
Catchwords:
Practice and procedure — Costs — Abuse of process — Insolvent plaintiff commenced proceedings — A non-party (with a commercial interest in the plaintiff succeeding) provided security for costs at first instance and the appeal — Security proved to be significantly insufficient compared with costs incurred — Shortfall could not be met by insolvent plaintiff — Whether non-party committed an abuse of process so as to be subject to a non-party costs order: r 42.3(2)(c) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) — Whether r 42.3(2)(c) requires an abuse in the actual conduct of proceedings — Proper test for abuse of process — Knight v F P Special Assets Ltd (1992) 174 CLR 178.
Appealed from NSW SC
CA: [2008] NSWCA 283.
Real Property
Mandurah Enterprises Pty Ltd & Ors v Western Australian Planning Commission
P37/2008: [2009] HCATrans
83.
Date heard: 1
May 2009 — Special leave
granted.
Catchwords:
Real property — Compulsory acquisition — Parts
of various lots of land reserved under a town planning scheme called the Peel
Regional Scheme (“the PRS”) for “Primary Regional Road”
— Land subsequently acquired by a single taking order under s 13 of the
Town Planning and Development Act 1928
(WA) for the purposes of railways as well as primary regional roads —
Acquisition included lands not reserved under the PRS — Whether
acquisition valid — Whether invalid takings of unreserved land and railway
land can be severed from valid takings.
Real property — Compulsory
acquisition — Whether acquisition of property for railway construction
nonetheless valid under s 161 of the Land
Administration Act 1997 (WA) permitting compulsory acquisition for public
works — Whether acquiring body (a local authority) can acquire land under
s 161 or whether it can only acquire land for town planning
purposes.
Real property — Compulsory acquisition — Access to
land — Whether acquiring body required to install a level crossing to
provide access to land under s 102 of the
Public Works Act 1902 (WA).
Appealed from WA SC
(CA): [2008] WASCA 211.
Statutes
Kirk & Anor v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales & Anor; Kirk Group Holdings Ltd & Anor v Workcover Authority of New South Wales (Inspector Childs); Kirk Group Holdings Ltd & Anor v Workcover Authority of New South Wales (Inspector Childs)
S346/2008; S347/2008;
S348/2008: [2009] HCATrans
93.
Date heard: 1
May 2009 — Special leave granted in
S346/2008; Special leave referred to Full Court in S347/2008 and
S348/2008.
Catchwords:
Statutes — Interpretation — Employer charged
under s 15 of the Occupational Health and
Safety Act 1983 (NSW), which requires that “[e]very employer shall
ensure the health, safety and welfare at work of all the employer’s
employees” — Industrial Court of NSW discounted any suggestion that
the duty is restricted to conduct that is “reasonably foreseeable”
— Whether Industrial Court’s construction of s 15 renders provision
incapable of compliance due to impossibility of creating risk free
environment.
Administrative law — Jurisdictional error — Full
Court of Industrial Court failed to consider one submission that underlay the
basis upon which leave to appeal was granted — Whether failure to consider
this submission constituted jurisdictional error —
Craig v South Australia (1995) 184 CLR
163.
Courts and judicial system — Jurisdiction — Whether an
appeal lies to the High Court from a judgment of the Industrial Court of
NSW.
Courts and judicial system — Jurisdiction — Applicants
sought to appeal the decision of the trial judge in the NSW Court of Criminal
Appeal and sought prerogative relief in the NSW Court of Appeal — The
Court of Criminal Appeal found no appeal was available under s 5 of the
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) —
The Court of Appeal refused prerogative relief — Full Court of Industrial
Court denied leave to file an appeal out of time — Whether it is
appropriate for an appellate court dealing with a criminal matter to decline to
exercise its discretion to hear an appeal out of time on the basis that the
appellant sought an alternative right of appeal.
S346/2008 appealed from
NSW SC (CA): [2008] NSWCA 156; (2008) 173 IR
465.
S347/2008 appealed from NSW IR
Comm: [2006] NSWIRComm 355; (2006) 158 IR
281.
S348/2008 appealed from NSW IR
Comm: [2007] NSWIRComm 86; (2006) 164 IR 146.
Taxes and Duties
****Bruton Holdings Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) v Commissioner of Taxation & Anor
S68/2009: [2009] HCATrans
138.
Date heard:
19 June 2009 — Special leave
granted.
Catchwords:
Taxes and duties — Funds of a trustee held by a third party — Commenced winding up of the trustee — Commissioner of Taxation (“the Commissioner”) issued notices under s 260-5 of sch 1 to the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth) requiring the monies held by the third party be paid to the Commissioner — Whether notices void and unenforceable for being an “attachment” within the meaning of s 500(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
Appealed from FCA
FC: [2008] FCAFC 184.
Torts
Amaca Pty Ltd v Ellis & Ors; State of South Australia v Ellis & Ors; Millennium Inorganic Chemicals Ltd v Ellis & Ors
P33/2008; P34/2008;
P35/2008: [2009] HCATrans
77.
Date heard: 1
May 2009 — Special leave
granted.
Catchwords:
Torts — Negligence — Causation — Risk of injury — “Cumulative injury” — Regular smoker who was exposed to asbestos during two periods of his working life died of lung cancer — Whether exposure to asbestos caused lung cancer — Whether increase in risk of injury can be sufficient to prove causation — Whether test for causation can be modified depending on the nature of the injury — Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd [2003] 1 AC 32; Barker v Corus UK Ltd [2006] 2 AC 572.
Appealed from WA SC
(CA): [2008] WASCA 200.
CAL No 14 Pty Ltd t/as Tandara Motor Inn & Anor v Motor Accidents Insurance Board; CAL No 14 Pty Ltd t/as Tandara Motor Inn & Anor v Scott
H4/2009; H5/2009: [2009] HCATrans
113.
Date heard:
29 May 2009 — Special leave
granted.
Catchwords:
Torts — Negligence — Duty of care — Respondent began drinking in a hotel owned by the Applicant — Applicant served Respondent a number of alcoholic drinks — Respondent put his motorcycle in hotel’s storeroom, saying that his wife would pick him up later that night — At end of the evening Respondent asked Applicant for motorcycle back — Applicant asked Respondent if he was “right to ride” and Respondent said he was fine — Respondent ran off road and died on way home — Whether Applicant owed Respondent duty of care to prevent Respondent from riding motorcycle whilst intoxicated.
Appealed from Tas SC
FC: [2009] TASSC 2.
Workers’ Compensation
Toyota Motor Corporation Australia Ltd v Jayatilake
M73/2008: [2009] HCATrans
118.
Date heard:
29 May 2009 — Special leave
granted.
Catchwords:
Workers’ compensation — “Serious injury” — Assessment of — Section 134AB(37) of the Accident Compensation Act 1985 (Vic) (“the Act”) defines “serious injury” to mean, inter alia, “permanent severe mental or permanent severe behavioural disturbance or disorder” — Term “severe” is to be satisfied by reference to consequences to worker of the injury with respect to pain and suffering or loss of earning capacity: s 134AB(38) — Psychological or psychiatric consequences of a physical injury and physical consequences of a mental disturbance or disorder are to be taken into account only where worker contends for a permanent serious mental disturbance or disorder: ss 134AB(38)(h), 134AB(38)(i) — Worker’s injury due partly to physical and partly to psychological or psychiatric conditions — Whether plaintiff must prove on the balance of probabilities that any pain and suffering consequences have an organic or physical basis, excluding pain and suffering resulting from injured person’s psychological response to physical injury — Whether finding of serious injury can be made on basis of injury suffered and likelihood that initial consequences of the injury will continue — Mutual Cleaning and Maintenance Pty Ltd v Stamboulakis [2007] VSCA 46.
Appealed from Vic SC
(CA): [2008] VSCA 167.
The following cases were refused special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia.
Canberra: 17 June 2009
(Publication of reasons)
Civil
Irwin & Anor v Meander Valley Council
H2/2009: [2009] HCASL
134.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from Tas SC FC:
[2008] TASSC 82.
Kang v Commonwealth of Australia
M12/2009: [2009] HCASL
135.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from FCA:
[2008] FCA 1863.
SZLSA v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor
S27/2009: [2009] HCASL
136.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from FCA:
[2009] FCA 23.
SZLZK v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor
S28/2009: [2009] HCASL
137.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from FCA:
[2009] FCA 102.
SZMFH v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor
S29/2009: [2009] HCASL
138.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from FCA:
[2009] FCA 105.
SZLYT v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor
S39/2009: [2009] HCASL
139.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from FCA:
[2009] FCA 76.
SZLFS & Anor v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor
S40/2009: [2009] HCASL
140.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from FCA:
[2009] FCA 75.
SZMGJ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor
S45/2009: [2009] HCASL
141.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from FCA:
[2009] FCA 91.
SZMRR v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor
S56/2009: [2009] HCASL
142.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from FCA:
[2009] FCA 159.
SZMOG v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor
S63/2009: [2009] HCASL
143.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from FCA:
[2009] FCA 156.
SZMNV & Anor v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor
S65/2009: [2009] HCASL
144.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from FCA:
[2009] FCA 172.
In the matter of an application by Gregory Eric White for leave to appeal
M19/2009: [2009] HCASL
145.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from HCA:
[2009]
HCATrans 11.
Smith v Hobart City Council
H1/2009: [2009] HCASL
146.
Special leave
dismissed.
Application for
removal.
Preston v Harbour Pacific Underwriting Management Pty Ltd & Ors
S491/2008: [2009] HCASL
147.
Special leave
dismissed with costs.
Appealed from
NSW SC (CA): [2008] NSWCA 216.
MZXQH & Ors v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor
M76/2008: [2009] HCASL
148.
Special leave
dismissed with costs.
Appealed from
FCA: [2008] FCA 1402.
Weinstein v Medical Practitioners Board of Victoria
M81/2008: [2009] HCASL
149.
Special leave
dismissed with costs.
Appealed from
Vic SC (CA): [2008] VSCA 193.
Daniels v Daniels
P1/2009: [2009] HCASL
150.
Special leave
dismissed with costs.
Appealed from
WA SC (CA): [2008] WASCA 230.
Criminal
Lumley v The Queen
B44/2008: [2009] HCASL
133.
Special leave
dismissed.
Appealed from Qld SC (CA):
[2008] QCA 155.
Sydney: 19 June 2009
Civil
Tervonen v Minister for Home Affairs
S91/2008.
Special
leave dismissed with costs.
Appealed
from FCA FC: [2008] FCAFC 24.
Tervonen v The Republic of Finland & Anor
S92/2008.
Special
leave dismissed with costs.
Appealed
from FCA FC: [2008] FCAFC 25.
Arnold v Hancock & Anor
S490/2008.
Special
leave dismissed with costs.
Appealed
from NSW SC (CA): [2008] NSWCA 254.
Ellis & Ors v Foley
S522/2008.
Special
leave dismissed with costs.
Appealed
from NSW SC (CA): [2008] NSWCA 288.
Thomas v HP Mercantile Pty Ltd; Thomas & Anor v HP Mercantile Pty Ltd; Thomas & Anor v HP Mercantile Pty Ltd
S560/2008; S565/2008;
S566/2008.
Special leave
dismissed with costs.
Appealed from
NSW SC (CA): [2008] NSWCA 308.
SZIGH v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor
S10/2009.
Special
leave dismissed with costs.
Appealed
from FCA: [2008] FCA 1885.
Tervonen v Finland & Anor
S26/2009.
Special
leave dismissed with costs.
Appealed
from FCA FC: [2009] FCAFC 4.
Criminal
Keir v The Queen
S31/2008.
Special
leave dismissed.
Appealed from NSW SC
(CCA): [2007] NSWCCA 149.
Brisbane: 25 June 2009
Civil
Elliott v West Australian Newspapers Ltd
P32/2008.
Special
leave dismissed with costs.
Appealed
from WA SC (CA): [2008] WASCA 172.
Criminal
East v The Queen
B42/2008.
Special
leave dismissed.
Appealed from Qld SC
(CA): [2008] QCA 325.
Kemp v The Queen
B47/2008.
Special
leave dismissed.
Appealed from Qld SC
(CA): [2008] QCA 355.
Hayes v The Queen
B7/2009.
Special
leave dismissed.
Appealed from Qld SC
(CA): [2008] QCA 371.
Pretorius v The Queen
B11/2009.
Special
leave dismissed.
Appealed from Qld SC
(CA): [2009] QCA 58.
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/hca/bulletin/2009/5.html