203 CLR 662; 75 ALJR 975; 179 ALR 416
Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Gummow, Hayne, Callinan JJ
Date: 24 May 2001 Case Number: M104/2000 M105/2000 M106/2000 M107/2000
Companies – Winding up in insolvency - Preference - Payments made by project manager to unsecured creditors - Payments from property subject to fixed and floating charge - Payments made after crystallisation of floating charge - Chargee took no action in relation to payments - Whether payments had effect of giving creditors a preference, priority or advantage over general body of unsecured creditors.
Words and phrases – "preference, priority or advantage".
Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – s 122(1), (2).
Companies Code (Vic) – s 451.
87 ALJR 549
Date: 1 Mar 2013 Case Number: B37/2012
Immigration – Visa application – Plaintiff applied for Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) Subclass 485 (Skilled – Graduate) visa requiring he have "competent English" – Plaintiff indicated his English was competent on visa application form and included reference number to a language test he had undertaken – The results of that test ("the first test results") did not achieve requisite score for competent English – Plaintiff sat second language test and achieved requisite score but results were not given to Department of Immigration and Citizenship – Using test reference number, departmental officer accessed first test results – Visa application refused on ground plaintiff did not satisfy criterion of competent English – Whether first test results were given by plaintiff for purpose of application – Whether first test results were "relevant information" for purposes of Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 57(1) – Whether Tribunal breached Migration Act, s 57(2).
Words and phrases – "competent English", "for the purpose of the application", "relevant information", "was not given by the applicant".
Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – s 57(1), (2).
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) – Sched 2, cl 485.
217 CLR 198; 78 ALJR 786; 206 ALR 116
Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Heydon JJ
Date: 19 May 2004 Case Number: M273/2003 M275/2003
Criminal law – Sentencing - Prosecution granted leave to file new presentment charging manslaughter in place of murder against two accused - Counsel for prosecution informed trial judge of "plea agreement" whereby accused would plead guilty and prosecution would submit that sentencing should proceed on basis that each accused was an aider or abettor rather than principal offender - Prosecution appeal against sentence on ground of manifest inadequacy - Appeal succeeded on basis that insufficient weight given to objective gravity of killing and aggravating circumstances, and undue weight given to youth and rehabilitation prospects of offenders - Whether Court of Appeal erred in dealing with the appeal in a manner contrary to the "plea agreement" - Effect of admission involved in pleading guilty to unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter - Culpability of aider and abettor relative to that of principal offender.
Criminal law – Sentencing - "Plea agreement" - Whether prosecution conduct of appeal was contrary to "plea agreement" - Respective responsibilities of prosecution, accused and trial judge with respect to "plea agreements" - Whether trial judge's responsibility to find and apply sentencing principles may be circumscribed by conduct of counsel - Whether appropriate that "plea agreement" should deal with issues of sentencing principle - Desirability of reducing "plea agreement" to writing - Discretion of appeal court in prosecution appeals against sentence to decline to intervene although error is shown in sentencing process.
Words and phrases – "plea agreement", "aider and abettor".
236 CLR 293; 82 ALJR 838; 245 ALR 613
Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel JJ
Date: 14 May 2008 Case Number: A2/2006
Criminal law – Practice and procedure - Directions to the jury - Deliberations continued, without success, for more than ten hours - The trial judge suggested that, if invited by the jury, she could suggest ways for the jury to "move forward" - Jury requested assistance - Further direction suggesting how the jury could approach its deliberations -The jury returned its guilty verdict about half an hour after the further direction - Balance of further direction - Whether the further direction constituted a miscarriage of justice.
Criminal law – Appeals - Application of the proviso - Whether no substantial miscarriage of justice actually occurred - Whether on the record of the trial an appellate court could conclude, beyond reasonable doubt, that the applicant was guilty - Relevance to the proviso of a separate consideration as to whether the trial was unfair - Relevance to the proviso of a consideration as to whether there has been such a departure from the essential requirements of the law that it goes to the root of the proceedings.
Criminal law – Practice and procedure - Legal representation of an accused - At the applicant's trial for murder, counsel sought to appear for the applicant in relation only to a voir dire hearing concerning the admissibility of certain evidence - Statement by the trial judge that counsel could not appear on the voir dire if counsel did not then represent the applicant for the entire trial - Counsel withdrew and applicant conducted voir dire himself - Error of law - Whether error constituted a miscarriage of justice.
Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) – ss 288, 353.
Criminal Law (Legal Representation) Act 2001 (SA) – s 11.
232 CLR 208; 82 ALJR 149; 241 ALR 1
Gleeson CJ, Kirby, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan JJ
Date: 6 Dec 2007 Case Number: B15/2007
Criminal law – Evidence – Video evidence of the complainant – Appellant charged with sexual offences against a child – Jury shown a videotape of the complainant's evidence in chief and cross-examination given at a preliminary hearing – Whether the videotape itself was admissible into evidence as an exhibit – Whether permitting the jury to replay the complainant's pre-recorded video evidence during its deliberations and in the absence of judge and counsel constituted a miscarriage of justice.
Criminal law – Evidence – Admissibility of prior consistent statements – Whether the complainant's written statement to police was admissible despite the tender of the pre recorded video evidence.
Criminal law – Jury trials – Directions – Whether a direction that the jury not give undue weight to the complainant's pre-recorded video evidence or written statement to police was required.
Criminal law – Appeals against conviction – Application of "proviso" – Nature of inquiry – Order of consideration of statutory criteria.
Criminal Code (Q) – s 668E.
Evidence Act 1977 (Q) – Div 4A of Pt 2, ss 93A, 98, 99.
78 ALJR 394; 204 ALR 258
Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Kirby, Hayne, Heydon JJ
Date: 11 Feb 2004 Case Number: S77/2003
Evidence – Judicial notice - Whether judicial notice can be taken that institutions such as the respondent use a standard form of guarantee.
Guarantee – Consequence of person named as co-surety not being shown to have executed guarantee.
Practice and procedure – High Court - Determination of appeal - Appellants' ground of appeal succeeds - Notice of Contention - Whether respondent should have leave to amend contentions sought in motion filed immediately before appeal hearing - Whether outstanding issues should be determined in intermediate appellate court.
Words and Phrases "judicial notice" – "common knowledge".
Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW).
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) – s 144.
Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW) – Pt 15 r 13(2).
Bell, Gageler, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 21 Jun 2017 Case Number: B72/2016
Criminal law – Appeal – Verdict unreasonable or insupportable having regard to evidence – Where appellant convicted on one count of aggravated indecent dealing with child and acquitted on two counts of aggravated indecent dealing with same child – Where appellant appealed conviction as unreasonable and inconsistent with acquittals – Whether Court of Appeal made independent assessment of sufficiency and quality of evidence in determining whether verdict unreasonable – Whether verdict unreasonable.
Words and phrases – "unreasonable verdict".
236 CLR 120; 82 ALJR 1465; 249 ALR 398
Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel JJ
Date: 4 Sep 2008 Case Number: S536/2007 S544/2007
Criminal law – Evidence - Unlawfully obtained - Part IAB of Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) ("Crimes Act") provided that person not liable for offences under Commonwealth, State or Territory law committed for purpose of controlled operation - Section 15M of Crimes Act provided for issue of certificate authorising controlled operation if authorising officer reasonably satisfied that, inter alia, unlawful activity in course of controlled operation would not seriously endanger health or safety of person - Section 16 of Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997 (NSW) ("LECO Act") provided that activity for purpose of controlled operation not unlawful despite other Act or law - Section 3(1) of LECO Act defined "controlled activity" as activity that would be unlawful but for operation of s 16 - Section 7 of LECO Act provided that authority to conduct controlled operation must not be granted if, inter alia, participant in proposed operation would engage in conduct likely to seriously endanger health or safety of person - Section 138 of Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) conferred upon trial judges discretion to exclude evidence obtained illegally.
Criminal law – Evidence - Unlawfully obtained - Commissioner issued authorities ("Authorities") under LECO Act authorising controlled operations - No authorities issued under Pt IAB of Crimes Act - Authorities authorised informer to sell cocaine to applicants - Cocaine not recovered by law enforcement officers - Applicants charged with taking part in supply of prohibited drug contrary to Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW).
Criminal law – Evidence - Unlawfully obtained - Whether Commissioner had power to issue Authorities where sale of cocaine without recovery strategy was decided at trial or upon judicial review to seriously endanger health or safety of person - Whether reference to "any other person" in s 7 of LECO Act confined to person in physical vicinity of authorised conduct or extended to person subject to foreseen and expected consequence of proposed controlled operation - Whether "controlled activity" within meaning of LECO Act extended to conduct unlawful by reason of contravention of Commonwealth law.
Judgments and orders – Judicial review - Declarations - Whether jurisdiction to entertain application to declare Authorities invalid - Whether discretion to do so should be exercised - Matters bearing on appropriateness of making declaration touching conduct of criminal proceedings.
Words and phrases – "controlled operation", "declarations", "seriously endanger health or safety".
Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997 (NSW).
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).
227 CLR 305; 81 ALJR 1012; 234 ALR 608
Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Heydon JJ
Date: 16 May 2007 Case Number: M132/2006
Chattel Securities Act 1987 (Vic) – Meaning of "security interest" - Where respondent had entered into a conditional sale agreement for motor vehicles with a third party - Where sale agreement contained a "Romalpa clause" - Where appellant was a purchaser from the third party - Competing interests of appellant and respondent - Whether respondent held a security interest - Whether including conditional sales within the meaning of security interest is consistent with the purpose and text of the Chattel Securities Act 1987 (Vic) - Whether rights over property owned by the debtor must be "conferred" on the creditor for a security interest to exist - Whether an interest over goods which is reserved, not created, can constitute a security interest.
Chattel Securities Act 1987 (Vic) – Priorities - Competing interests of appellant and respondent - Whether respondent's "security interest" lost for want of registration.
Property – Chattels - Priorities - Interest of vendor under a conditional sale.
Statutory construction – Legislative history - Relevance of textual differences between original and re-enacted versions of statute - Relevance of common law concepts when construing statutory definitions.
Words and Phrases – "security interest".
Chattel Securities Act 1987 (Vic) – ss 3(1), 3(3), 7(1), 7(6).
Goods Act 1958 (Vic) – ss 27, 31.
209 CLR 478; 76 ALJR 828; 188 ALR 353
Gaudron, McHugh, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan JJ
Date: 30 May 2002 Case Number: S43/2001
Appeals – Interlocutory orders – Interlocutory order dispensing with a jury in the trial of a civil matter – Leave to appeal against interlocutory order not sought – Action tried by judge alone – Later appeal against both final judgment and order to dispense with a jury – Whether order to dispense with a jury gave rise to a substantial wrong or miscarriage warranting an order for a new trial.
Practice and procedure – Interlocutory order – Entitlement of disaffected party to save up challenge as ground of appeal against final judgment.
Courts – Statutory conferral of discretionary powers – Need to exercise powers in accordance with the statutory grant – Need to afford liberal construction to powers conferred on courts.
Words and phrases – "substantial wrong or miscarriage".
District Court Act 1973 (NSW) – s 79A.
Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW) – Pt 51AA r 16.
214 CLR 604; 77 ALJR 1396; 199 ALR 497
Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan JJ
Date: 5 Aug 2003 Case Number: P63/2002
Insurance – Contracts – Insurance cover against liability to third parties arising from use of marine pleasure craft for commercial paraflying – Where paraflying to be conducted in estuarine waters – Whether policy a contract to which Marine Insurance Act 1909 (Cth) applied – Whether policy a contract of marine insurance.
Words and phrases – "contract of marine insurance", "incident to marine adventure", "maritime perils", "sea", "ship".
Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) – s 9(1)(d).
Marine Insurance Act 1909 (Cth) – ss 7, 8, 9.
Marine Insurance Act 1906 (UK).
Merchant Shipping Act 1894 (Imp).
214 CLR 269; 77 ALJR 1205; 198 ALR 100
Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan JJ
Date: 18 Jun 2003 Case Number: S111/2002 S112/2002 S113/2002
Torts – Negligence – Psychiatric injury – Employee killed in workplace accident – Whether employer owed duty of care to children of deceased employee – Whether reasonable care required to guard against the risk of psychiatric injury – Whether duty existed at common law – Whether the existence of duty was negated by s 4(1)(b) of Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1944 (NSW).
Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1944 (NSW) – s 4(1)(b).
Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW) – s 151P.
201 CLR 414; 74 ALJR 676; 170 ALR 88
Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Gummow, Hayne, Callinan JJ
Date: 23 Mar 2000 Case Number: B47/1999
Criminal law – Murder - Appeal against conviction - Misdirection by trial judge - Failure to leave manslaughter to jury - Whether jury properly instructed would necessarily have returned verdict of guilty of murder - Whether no substantial miscarriage of justice actually occurred - Whether failure to leave manslaughter to jury constitutes substantial miscarriage of justice where jury's verdict of guilty of murder consistent only with satisfaction of elements of offence of murder.
Criminal Code (Q) – ss 7(1), 8, 668E(1), 668E(1A).
219 CLR 1; 78 ALJR 64; 202 ALR 202
Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan JJ
Date: 12 Nov 2003 Case Number: A200/2002
Criminal law – Murder – Joint criminal enterprise – Appeal against conviction – Misdirection by trial judge – Failure to leave manslaughter to jury – Whether jury properly instructed would necessarily have returned verdict of guilty of murder – Whether failure to leave manslaughter to jury occasioned substantial miscarriage of justice.
Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) – s 353(1).
88 ALJR 606; 308 ALR 190
French CJ, Crennan, Bell, Gageler, Keane JJ
Date: 14 May 2014 Case Number: C20/2013
Criminal law – Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Sexual offences – Sexual intercourse without consent – Act of indecency without consent – Whether jury misdirected on mental element of offences – Whether jury misdirected on mental element of offences where statute negates consent.
Statutes – Interpretation – Whether prosecution must prove accused had knowledge that consent was caused by Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) s 67(1) circumstance – Whether recklessness as to Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) s 67(1) circumstance sufficient to establish mental element of offence.
Words and phrases – "consent", "recklessness".
Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) – ss 54, 60, 67.
77 ALJR 1195; 198 ALR 250
Gummow, Hayne, Callinan JJ
Date: 17 Jun 2003 Case Number: S195/2002
Income taxation – Assessment - Objection and appeal - Review process established by Pt IVC, Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth) - Whether covering cl 5 of the Constitution empowers appellant to seek collateral relief pursuant to s 75(v) of the Constitution in respect of an assessment by the Commissioner of Taxation - Whether existence of avenue of appeal to High Court is relevant to the exercise of discretion in granting relief pursuant to s 75(v) of the Constitution.
Income taxation – Assessable income - Taxation Determination - Whether alleged failure by Commissioner of Taxation to bring relevant Taxation Determination to the attention of the appellant and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal ("AAT") amounts to "equitable fraud" - Whether Commissioner's conduct, in alleged contravention of s 14ZZF(1)(a)(v) of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth), gives rise to jurisdictional error by AAT.
Practice and procedure – Federal jurisdiction - s 78B, Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) - Whether compliance with s 78B(1) is a necessary condition for the further exercise of jurisdiction by the court in question.
Constitution – s 75(v).
Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – s 78B.
Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth) – Pt IVC.
French CJ, Kiefel, Gageler, Keane, Nettle JJ
Date: 17 Jun 2015 Case Number: S58/2015
Property – Leases – Section 92(1)(d) of Liquor Act 2007 (NSW) provides that licensee must not grant lease over certain parts of licensed premises without approval of Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority – Where lease granted in breach of s 92(1)(d) – Whether lease void and unenforceable.
Contracts – Statutory illegality – Where lease granted in contravention of s 92(1)(d) of Liquor Act 2007 (NSW) – Where Liquor Act imposes statutory penalty for breach – Whether lease void and unenforceable.
Liquor Act 2007 (NSW) – s 92(1)(d).
Retail Leases Act 1994 (NSW) – ss 6A, 8(1), 16(1), 16(2).
229 CLR 498; 81 ALJR 919; 234 ALR 131
Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan, Crennan JJ
Date: 19 Apr 2007 Case Number: S355/2006
Damages – s 45 of the Motor Accidents Act 1988 (NSW) obliged an insurer to make certain payments to or on behalf of the victim of a motor accident once the insurer admitted liability to the victim – Treatment of these payments in assessing damages – Whether these payments should be removed from the calculation before or after reducing on account of contributory negligence the amount of damages assessed – What onus of proof should apply to a dispute over such damages.
Damages – Assessment of life expectancy – Whether reference should be made to "projected" or "historical" life expectancy tables.
Words and phrases – "best evidence rule", "contributory negligence", "damages payable", "damages recoverable", "defence".
Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1965 (NSW).
Motor Accidents Act 1988 (NSW) – ss 2A, 45, 74.
Motor Accidents Amendment Act 1995 (NSW).
Workers' Compensation Act 1926 (NSW).
76 ALJR 1024; 190 ALR 370
Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan JJ
Date: 8 Aug 2002 Case Number: P91/2000
Evidence – Admissibility – Negligence – Collateral facts – Credibility – Whether failure to allow appellant to reopen his case to adduce evidence in reply going to his credit constituted a miscarriage of justice.
Evidence – Evidence available only after close of appellant's case – Whether Commissioner erred in not allowing appellant to reopen his case to adduce such evidence – Whether miscarriage of justice in the circumstances.
249 CLR 435; 87 ALJR 235; 294 ALR 404
French CJ, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel JJ
Date: 6 Feb 2013 Case Number: S175/2012
Trade practices – Misleading or deceptive conduct – Search engine operator displayed "sponsored links" on search results page – Sponsored links created by or at direction of advertisers – Sponsored links comprised advertising text which directed users to web sites of advertisers' choosing – Whether search engine operator engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct by publishing or displaying sponsored links which contained misleading representations made by advertisers – Whether search engine operator adopted or endorsed misleading representations.
Words and phrases – "adoption", "endorsement", "intermediary", "misleading or deceptive conduct", "misleading representation".
Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) – ss 52, 85(3).
231 CLR 334; 81 ALJR 507; 231 ALR 582
Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Callinan, Heydon JJ
Date: 15 Dec 2006 Case Number: S62/2006
Courts – Federal jurisdiction in State courts – Proceedings brought in New South Wales District Court – Section 1337E of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ("Corporations Act") conferred federal jurisdiction on "lower courts" in "matters" under the Corporations Act – Section 588FF(3) of the Corporations Act provided for time limits on commencement of actions – Part 3 r 2 of the District Court Rules 1973 (NSW) ("the Rules") authorised extension of time – Whether s 79 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) "picked up" the provisions of the Rules relating to extension of time – Whether the Corporations Act was a Commonwealth law that "otherwise provided" to prevent the provisions of the Rules relating to extension of time being "picked up".
Limitation of Actions – Proceedings brought under the Corporations Act – Proceedings deemed to be dismissed by Pt 18 r 9 of the Rules – Whether extension of time under Pt 3 r 2 of the Rules valid.
Words and phrases – "otherwise provided", "dismissal", "picked up".
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – ss 9, 1337E, 588FF.
District Court Act 1973 (NSW) – ss 8, 161.
District Court Rules 1973 (NSW) – Pt 3 r 2(2), Pt 18 r 9.
Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – s 79.