Judgments, ordered by case name

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXY

Now Showing items 490 to 509  Previous Page   Next Page

Jump to page of 54


K-Generation Pty Limited v Liquor Licensing Court [2009] HCA 4

237 CLR 501; 83 ALJR 327; 252 ALR 471
French CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel JJ
Date: 2 Feb 2009 Case Number: A12/2008
Constitutional law (Cth) – Chapter III - Judicial power - Vesting of federal jurisdiction in State courts - Licensing Court of South Australia established under Liquor Licensing Act 1997 (SA) ("Licensing Act") - Licensing Court constituted by District Court judge - Whether Licensing Court "court of a State" within meaning of s 77(iii) of Constitution - Whether Licensing Court invested with federal jurisdiction by s 39(2) of Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) ("Judiciary Act") - Significance of absence of express power of punishment for contempt.

Constitutional law (Cth) – Chapter III - Judicial power - Vesting of federal jurisdiction in State courts - Integrity of State courts - Requirement of impartiality and independence for repository of federal jurisdiction - Licensing Act, s 28A required Licensing Court to take steps to maintain confidentiality of information classified by Commissioner of Police as "criminal intelligence" in proceedings under Licensing Act - Steps included receipt of evidence and argument in absence of parties - Whether s 28A invalid for denying Licensing Court character of independent and impartial tribunal.

Statutes – Interpretation - Licensing Act, s 28A - "Criminal intelligence" defined to include information which "could reasonably be expected" to prejudice criminal investigations - Whether classification by Commissioner of Police of information as "criminal intelligence" amenable to review by Licensing Court - Whether mandatory for Licensing Court to hear evidence and argument in absence of parties.

Constitutional law (Cth) – Chapter III - Judicial power - Vesting of federal jurisdiction in State courts - Integrity of State courts - Whether consequence of impairment of integrity is that Licensing Court no longer "court of a State" to which s 77(iii) of Constitution applies - Whether s 39(2) of Judiciary Act ambulatory and would cease to apply - Whether States may establish "court of a State" then subsequently deprive court of independence and impartiality.

Constitutional law (Cth) – Chapter III - Judicial power - Nature of judicial power - Whether exercise by Licensing Court of judicial or administrative power.

Practice and procedure – Interveners - Procedure where interveners seek remedy and assert arguments opposed by immediate parties.

Words and phrases – "could reasonably be expected", "court of a State", "criminal intelligence".

Constitution – Ch III, s 77.

Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – s 39.

Liquor Licensing Act 1997 (SA) – s 28A.

Kakavas v Crown Melbourne Limited [2013] HCA 25

87 ALJR 708; 298 ALR 35
French CJ, Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell, Gageler, Keane JJ
Date: 5 Jun 2013 Case Number: M117/2012
Equity – Unconscionable conduct – Where appellant gambled at first respondent's casino and lost $20. 5 million – Where appellant diagnosed as suffering from condition known as "pathological gambling" – Where appellant subject to "interstate exclusion order" under Casino Control Act 1991 (Vic) – Whether gambling transactions affected by unconscionable dealing – Whether appellant suffered from special disadvantage making him susceptible to exploitation – Whether first respondent had sufficient knowledge of any special disadvantage.

Words and phrases – "actual knowledge", "constructive notice", "interstate exclusion order", "special disadvantage", "unconscionable conduct".

Casino Control Act 1991 (Vic) – ss 76, 77(2), 78B.

Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) – s 51AA.

Kamleh v The Queen [2005] HCA 2

79 ALJR 541; 213 ALR 97
Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Kirby, Hayne, Heydon JJ
Date: 3 Feb 2005 Case Number: A30/2004
Criminal law – Evidence – Hearsay – Appellant charged with murder – Alleged accomplice not called as witness – Admissibility of evidence of out-of-court statements to prove relevant facts other than the truth of the representations made in the statements – Whether evidence of out-of-court statements adduced to prove intention is admissible – Walton v The Queen (1989) 166 CLR 283 discussed.

Evidence – Hearsay – Criminal law – Admissibility of out-of-court statements to prove relevant facts other than the truth of the representations made in the statements – Walton v The Queen (1989) 166 CLR 283 discussed.

Karpany v Dietman [2013] HCA 47

88 ALJR 90; 303 ALR 216
French CJ, Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell, Gageler, Keane JJ
Date: 6 Nov 2013 Case Number: A18/2012
Native title – Native title right to take fish – Fisheries Act 1971 (SA) prohibited taking fish without licence or except as provided by the Act – Fisheries Act permitted taking fish by certain means without licence for non-commercial purposes – Whether statute inconsistent with continued existence of native title right to take fish – Whether native title right extinguished by pre-1975 State fisheries legislation.

Native title – Native title right to take fish – Native title holders charged with possessing undersize abalone contrary to s 72(2)(c) of Fisheries Management Act 2007 (SA) – Section 115 of Fisheries Management Act provided for ministerial exemption – Whether ministerial exemption "licence, permit or other instrument" for the purposes of s 211 of Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

Words and phrases – "extinguishment", "inconsistent with the continued existence of a native title right", "licence, permit or other instrument", "native title rights and interests".

Fisheries Act 1917 (SA) – ss 39, 48.

Fisheries Act 1971 (SA) – ss 28, 29, 42, 47.

Fisheries Management Act 2007 (SA) – ss 3, 5, 72, 115.

Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) – ss 11, 211, 223.

Kelly v The Queen [2004] HCA 12

218 CLR 216; 78 ALJR 538; 205 ALR 274
Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Kirby, Hayne, Heydon JJ
Date: 10 Mar 2004 Case Number: H1/2003
Criminal Law – Evidence - Admissibility of statement made to police after video-recorded interview was completed - Where statement was not made in response to any police question - Whether the statement was "made in the course of official questioning" within the meaning of s 8(1)(b) of the Criminal Law (Detention and Interrogation) Act 1995 (Tas).

Evidence – Admissibility - Statement made to police after video-recorded interview completed - Where statement was not made in response to any police question - Whether the statement was "made in the course of official questioning" within the meaning of s 8(1)(b) of the Criminal Law (Detention and Interrogation) Act 1995 (Tas).

Criminal Law – Appeal - Proviso - No substantial miscarriage of justice.

Statutes – Construction - Purposive construction - Use of definition sections to aid statutory construction.

Words and Phrases "made in the course of official questioning" – "confession or admission".

Criminal Law (Detention and Interrogation) Act 1995 (Tas) – ss 8(1), 8(2)(a).

Criminal Code (Tas) – s 402(2).

Kendirjian v Lepore [2017] HCA 13

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 29 Mar 2017 Case Number: S170/2016
Legal practitioners – Negligence – Advocates' immunity from suit – Where settlement offer made and rejected on first day of trial – Where rejection of settlement offer followed by judicial decision – Where damages awarded lower than settlement offer – Where solicitor and barrister alleged to have given negligent advice in relation to settlement offer – Whether advice affected conduct of case in court by bearing upon court's determination of case – Whether advocate immune from suit.

High Court – Stare decisis – Whether Attwells v Jackson Lalic Lawyers Pty Ltd (2016) 90 ALJR 572; 331 ALR 1; [2016] HCA 16 should be reopened.

Words and phrases – "advocates' immunity", "affecting the conduct of the case", "finality", "functional connection", "intimately connected", "judicial determination", "possibility of challenge to findings".

Kennedy Cleaning Services Pty Limited v Petkoska [2000] HCA 45

200 CLR 286; 74 ALJR 1298; 174 ALR 626
Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan JJ
Date: 31 Aug 2000 Case Number: C16/1999
Workers' compensation (ACT) – Injury - Personal injury arising in the course of employment - Employee had diseased heart valve and suffered a lesion caused by a blood clot which resulted in a stroke - Whether mutually exclusive statutory regimes for "injury" and "disease".

Words and phrases – "injury" - "disease" - "lesion".

Workers' Compensation Act 1951 (ACT) – ss 6(1), 7(1), 9, 9A, 9B.

Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW) – s 4.

Kennon v Spry [2008] HCA 56

238 CLR 366; 83 ALJR 145; 251 ALR 257
French CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Kiefel JJ
Date: 3 Dec 2008 Case Number: M25/2008 M26/2008
Family law – Courts having jurisdiction in matrimonial causes - Powers - Jurisdiction under s 79(1) of Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) to make orders - "Proceedings with respect to the property of the parties to the marriage or either of them" - Definition of "property" of parties to marriage - Whether right of wife with respect to due administration of trust and discretionary power of husband to appoint whole of trust assets to wife constituted part of the property of the parties to the marriage.

Family law – Courts having jurisdiction in matrimonial causes - Powers - s 85A of Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) - Court's power to make orders respecting property the subject of "ante-nuptial or post-nuptial settlements made in relation to the marriage" - Whether contributions by parties to existing trust are post- nuptial settlements - Whether just and equitable - Interests of third parties.

Family law – Courts having jurisdiction in matrimonial causes - Powers - s 79(1) of Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) - Whether "parties to the marriage or either of them" includes reference to persons who were parties to marriage since dissolved before court makes an order - Power of court to proceed in property settlement "as if" changes to property rights otherwise brought about by anterior divorce had not yet occurred.

Family law – Divorce and other matrimonial causes - Division of assets - Trusts and trustees - Wife one of the class of objects of discretionary trust - Right in equity to due administration of trust - Whether existence of such a right depends on entitlement to any fixed and transmissible beneficial interest in trust fund.

Statutory construction – Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) - Policy regarding contributions to property - Relevance to provisions relating to orders with respect to settlement of property.

Statutory construction – Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) - s 85A - Purposes with respect to settlement - Degree of association ("made in relation to") between settlement of property and marriage.

Words and phrases – "ante-nuptial or post-nuptial settlements" "made in relation to" "parties to the marriage or either of them" "property" "with respect to the property of the parties to the marriage".

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Pt VIII, ss 4, 79, 80, 85A, 106B.

Kentwell v The Queen [2014] HCA 37

88 ALJR 947; 313 ALR 451
French CJ, Hayne, Bell, Gageler, Keane JJ
Date: 9 Oct 2014 Case Number: S113/2014
Criminal law – Appeal – Application to extend time within which to apply for leave to appeal against sentence – Principles to be applied in determining whether extension of time should be granted – Whether applicant required to demonstrate that refusal of application would occasion substantial injustice – Relevance of principle of finality – Relevance of prospect of success should extension be granted – Whether extension of time should be granted.

Criminal law – Appeal – Appeal against sentence – Appellate court's power to re-exercise sentencing discretion – Where error of the kind identified in House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 established – Whether appellate court must form positive opinion that some other sentence is warranted in law before intervening.

Words and phrases – "Abdul test", "principle of finality", "substantial injustice", "warranted in law".

Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) – ss 6(3), 10(1)(b).

Criminal Appeal Rules (NSW) – rr 3A, 3B.

Keramianakis v Regional Publishers Pty Ltd [2009] HCA 18

237 CLR 268; 83 ALJR 680; 254 ALR 637
French CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell JJ
Date: 29 Apr 2009 Case Number: S311/2008
Practice and procedure – Appeals - Availability of appeal where trial in District Court of New South Wales conducted with jury - Where trial judge entered "verdict" for defendant following jury's answers to questions - Whether appellant a party "dissatisfied with a Judge's - judgment or order in an action" within meaning of District Court Act 1973 (NSW), s 127(1) - Relevance of absence in Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) of express provision conferring power on Court of Appeal in relation to appeals from District Court trial with jury.

Practice and procedure – Appeals - Where right of appeal exists in respect of "a Judge's - judgment or order in an action" - Relevance of cases dealing with phrase "all judgments, decrees, orders, and sentences" in Constitution, s 73.

Words and phrases – "all judgments, decrees, orders, and sentences", "Judge's - judgment or order in an action".

Defamation Act 1974 (NSW) – s 7A.

District Court Act 1973 (NSW) – ss 126, 127(1).

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) – ss 22, 75A.

Kettering Pty Ltd v Noosa Shire Council [2004] HCA 33

78 ALJR 1022; 207 ALR 1
McHugh, Gummow, Hayne, Callinan, Heydon JJ
Date: 23 Jun 2004 Case Number: B52/2003 B53/2003
Planning law – Compensation for alleged diminution in value of land – Appellant owned land in Noosa – Town planning scheme amended by a Development Control Plan ("DCP") – DCP constrained development potential of appellant's land thereby diminishing its market value – Appellant sought compensation from respondent pursuant to Local Government (Planning and Environment) Act 1990 (Q) ("the Act"), s 3. 5(1) – Compensation not payable where land affected by a planning scheme which had the effect of prohibiting or restricting "use of land or erection or use of building or other structure thereon for a particular purpose" – Whether the Act precluded appellant's claim for compensation.

Courts – Jurisdiction – Trial of one of several separate issues – Issue reserved for later determination – Appeal to Court of Appeal with respect to issue decided – Whether Court of Appeal erred in determining issue reserved for later determination.

Local Government (Planning and Environment) Act 1990 (Q) – ss 3. 4, 3. 5.

Kimberly-Clark Australia Pty Ltd v Arico Trading International Pty Ltd [2001] HCA 8

207 CLR 1; 75 ALJR 518; 177 ALR 460
Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Gummow, Hayne, Callinan JJ
Date: 15 Feb 2001 Case Number: S75/2000
Patents – Validity – Revocation – Whether invention sufficiently described – Whether complete specification includes claims – Whether sufficiency determined by reference to skilled addressee.

Words and phrases – "invention" – "complete specification" – "skilled addressee".

Patents Act 1952 (Cth).

Patents Act 1990 (Cth)
– ss 40(2), 40(3), 138.

King v Philcox [2015] HCA 19

French CJ, Kiefel, Gageler, Keane, Nettle JJ
Date: 10 Jun 2015 Case Number: A26/2014
Negligence – Duty of care – Mental harm – Motor accident – Civil Liability Act 1936 (SA) – Appellant negligently drove motor vehicle resulting in death of passenger – Respondent witnessed aftermath – Respondent later realised brother died in accident – Whether appellant as driver owed duty of care to passenger's brother not to cause mental harm – Whether mental harm to brother of person killed foreseeable under s 33 of Civil Liability Act – Whether sibling relationship relevant to foreseeability.

Negligence – Damages for mental harm – Civil Liability Act 1936 (SA) – Whether respondent present at scene of accident when accident occurred – Whether accident includes aftermath.

Words and phrases – "accident", "duty of care", "incident", "present at the scene of the accident when the accident occurred", "proximity", "reasonably foreseeable".

Civil Liability Act 1936 (SA) – ss 33, 53(1)(a).

King v The Queen [2003] HCA 42

215 CLR 150; 77 ALJR 1477; 199 ALR 568
Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Callinan, Heydon JJ
Date: 6 Aug 2003 Case Number: P28/2001
Criminal law – Burglary - Offence of committing an offence in the place of another person when in that place without that other person's consent - Criminal Code (WA), s 401(2) - Onus of proof - Onus on prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt absence of consent under s 401(2) - Where offence alleged to be committed was breach of restraining order - Where restraining order prohibited entry onto premises - Statutory provision for defence to offence of breach of restraining order if defendant proves on balance of probabilities existence of consent to be on premises - Whether provision relevant - Whether Court of Appeal erred in dismissing appeal from trial judge's jury direction that onus was on prosecution throughout to negative consent.

Criminal Code (WA) – s 401(2).

Restraining Orders Act 1997 (WA) – ss 61, 62.

King v The Queen [2012] HCA 24

245 CLR 588; 86 ALJR 833; 288 ALR 565
French CJ, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell JJ
Date: 20 Jun 2012 Case Number: M129/2011
Criminal law – Appeal against conviction - Jury misdirection - Appellant convicted of two counts of "culpable driving causing death" contrary to s 318(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) ("the Act") - Jury had power under the Act to return an alternative verdict of "dangerous driving causing death" contrary to s 319(1) if satisfied that accused not guilty of offence charged under s 318 - Trial judge directed jury that dangerous driving established by proof accused drove in way that "significantly increased the risk of harming others" and that Crown did not have to show driving was "deserving of criminal punishment" - Whether trial judge misdirected jury - Whether R v De Montero (2009) 25 VR 694 should be followed - Whether departure from trial according to law or miscarriage of justice.

Words and phrases – "culpable driving causing death", "deserving of criminal punishment", "dangerous driving causing death".

Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) – ss 318, 319, 422A(1).

Kirk v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales [2010] HCA 1

239 CLR 531; 84 ALJR 154; 262 ALR 569
French CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell JJ
Date: 3 Feb 2010 Case Number: S106/2009 S347/2008 S348/2008
Occupational health and safety – Statutory duty - Occupational Health and Safety Act 1983 (NSW), ss 15 and 16 provided duties of employer to "ensure the health, safety and welfare at work of all the employer's employees" and that "persons not in the employer's employment are not exposed to risks to their health or safety arising from the conduct of the employer's undertaking" - Section 53(a) provided a defence where it was "not reasonably practicable . . . to comply with the provision of this Act" - Breach of duty criminal offence - Statement of offences as particularised did not identify what measures defendant could have taken but did not take to fulfil duty - Whether statement of offence must identify act or omission said to constitute contravention of s 15 or s 16 - Whether failure to charge act or omission an error of law - Whether error on the face of the record - Whether jurisdictional error.

Evidence – Competence and compellability of accused persons - Joint trial - Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW), s 163(2) required hearing to be conducted in accordance with the rules of evidence - Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 17(2) provided that a defendant is not competent to give evidence as witness for prosecution - No power of Industrial Court of New South Wales to dispense with s 17(2) - Defendant called as witness for prosecution - Whether jurisdictional error - Whether error on the face of the record.

Administrative law – Jurisdictional error - Error of law on the face of the record - Whether orders in nature of certiorari available.

Statutes – Privative clause - Industrial Court of New South Wales - Construction of privative clause - Whether privative provision effective to prevent review for jurisdictional error - Whether effective to prevent review for error of law on the face of the record - Relevance of exclusion of right to appeal to Supreme Court of New South Wales and to High Court of Australia.

Constitutional law (Cth) – Chapter III - State Supreme Courts - Power of State Parliament to alter defining characteristic of Supreme Court of a State - Supervisory jurisdiction - Whether a defining characteristic is power to confine inferior courts and tribunals within limit of their authority to decide.

Procedure – Costs - Appellate court exercising supervisory not appellate jurisdiction - Appellate court makes orders in nature of certiorari - Whether appellate court has power to make orders in place of orders quashed.

Words and phrases – "act or omission", "certiorari", "description of offence", "error of law on the face of the record", "jurisdictional error", "privative provisions", "reasonably practicable", "superior court of record", "Supreme Court of a State", "the record".

Constitution – Ch III, ss 71, 73, 75(v).

Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) – s 11.

Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) – ss 17(2), 190.

Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW) – ss 179, 163(2).

Occupational Health and Safety Act 1983 (NSW) – ss 15, 16, 53.

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) – s 69.

Supreme Court (Summary Jurisdiction) Act 1967 (NSW) – ss 4, 6.

Klein v Minister for Education [2007] HCA 2

81 ALJR 582; 232 ALR 306
Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Heydon JJ
Date: 1 Feb 2007 Case Number: P31/2006
Statutes – Interpretation – Meaning and effect of s 175 of Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA) – Application to public authority – Section 175(1) deemed a principal who contracts with a contractor to be the employer of a worker employed by the contractor, and made principal jointly and severally liable to pay compensation for which contractor was liable to the worker – Section 175(3) provided that a principal was not liable unless work on which worker was employed at the time of disability was "directly a part or process in the trade or business of the principal" – Pt IV Div 2 contained provisions constraining awards of common law damages in actions for damages against a worker's employer brought independently of the Act – Minister contracted with company to provide security at schools – Appellant was employed as security guard by company – Appellant was injured while pursuing intruder at school – Appellant sued Minister as occupier of premises at which appellant injured – Whether s 175(1) deemed the Minister to be the appellant's employer – Whether work on which appellant was employed at time of injury was "directly a part or process in the trade or business" of Minister – Whether effect of deeming provision was to apply constraints on damages in Pt IV Div 2 to appellant's claim.

Practice and procedure – Grant of special leave to appeal – Whether matters of statutory interpretation arose without reconsideration of the law as stated in Hewitt v Benale Pty Ltd (2002) 27 WAR 91 – Whether special leave should be revoked – Relevance of common ground between the parties – Relevance of refusal by High Court to permit enlargement of grounds of appeal – Relevance of supervening amendment of the legislation – Relevance of duty to quell the controversy brought to the Court by the parties.

Words and phrases – "deemed employer", "directly", "directly a part or process in the trade or business of", "employee", "principal".

Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA) – Pt IV Div 2, ss 6, 175(1), 175(3), 175(7).

Interpretation Act 1984 (WA) – s 8.

Occupiers' Liability Act 1985 (WA) – s 5.

Workers Compensation for Accidents Act 1900 (NZ) – s 15.

Kline v Official Secretary to the Governor General [2013] HCA 52

249 CLR 645; 88 ALJR 161; 304 ALR 116
French CJ, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell, Gageler JJ
Date: 6 Dec 2013 Case Number: B47/2013
Administrative law − Freedom of information − Request for access to documents − Section 6A(1) of Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth) provided that documents held by Official Secretary to the Governor –General were excluded from disclosure unless they related to "matters of an administrative nature" − Whether documents relating to nomination of person to Order of Australia were excluded from disclosure by operation of s 6A(1).

Words and phrases − "matters of an administrative nature".

Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth)
– ss 5, 6, 6A.

Knight v Victoria [2017] HCA 29

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 17 Aug 2017 Case Number: M251/2015
Constitutional law (Cth) – Constitution – Ch III – State Supreme Courts – Principle in Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (1996) 189 CLR 51; [1996] HCA 24 – Where s 74AA of Corrections Act 1986 (Vic) prevents parole order in respect of plaintiff unless Adult Parole Board satisfied plaintiff in imminent danger of dying or seriously incapacitated and does not have physical ability to harm any person – Where s 74AA identifies plaintiff by name and only applies to plaintiff – Whether s 74AA interferes with sentences imposed by Supreme Court in manner which substantially impairs institutional integrity of Supreme Court – Whether Crump v New South Wales (2012) 247 CLR 1; [2012] HCA 20 distinguishable – Whether necessary or appropriate to decide if function conferred by s 74AA could validly be exercised by division of Adult Parole Board which includes current judicial officer.

Words and phrases – "enlistment of judicial officers", "institutional integrity", "minimum term", "non-parole period", "parole", "party-specific legislation", "sentencing".

Constitution – Ch III.

Corrections Act 1986 (Vic) – ss 61, 61A, 64, 74, 74AA, 74AAB.

Corrections Amendment (Parole) Act 2014 (Vic) – ss 1, 3.

Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984 (Vic) – ss 4, 6.

Penalties and Sentences Act 1985 (Vic) – s 17.

Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) – Sched 1, cl 2.

Koehler v Cerebos (Australia) Ltd [2005] HCA 15

222 CLR 44; 79 ALJR 845; 214 ALR 355
McHugh, Gummow, Hayne, Callinan, Heydon JJ
Date: 6 Apr 2005 Case Number: P61/2004
Negligence – Duty of care - Psychiatric injury - Content of an employer's duty to an employee to take reasonable care to avoid psychiatric injury - Whether employer breached its duty to provide employee with a safe system of work by failing to take the steps identified by employee - Whether reasonable person in position of employer would have foreseen the risk of psychiatric injury to the employee - Relevance of employee's agreement to perform the work which brought about her injuries - Whether the law of negligence should be developed in such a way as to inhibit the making of agreements involving more work than an industry standard.

Contract – Contract of employment - Freedom of parties to stipulate that an employee will do more work than an industry standard - Whether the law of negligence should be developed in such a way as to inhibit the making of agreements involving more work than an industry standard.

Koompahtoo Local Aboriginal Land Council v Sanpine Pty Limited [2007] HCA 61

233 CLR 115; 82 ALJR 345; 241 ALR 88
Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Heydon, Crennan JJ
Date: 13 Dec 2007 Case Number: S221/2007
Contract – Repudiation - First respondent was held by the trial judge to have grossly departed from the terms of a contract with the first appellant - First appellant purported to accept a repudiation of that contract - Difference between renunciation of a contract, where a party evinces an inability or unwillingness to render substantial performance of a contract, and repudiation, in the form of a breach justifying termination - Classification of contractual terms for the purpose of determining the consequences of a breach - Whether case was one of breach of a condition or sufficiently serious breach of an intermediate term - Whether breach went to root of contract - Relevance of adequacy of damages as a remedy - Relevance of failure to complain of breaches.

Contract – Termination for breach - Governing principles - Whether class of intermediate or innominate terms should be recognised.

Words and phrases – "repudiation", "renunciation", "condition", "intermediate term".

Now Showing items 490 to 509  Previous Page   Next Page

Back to the top