DPP Reference No 1 of 2019 [2021] HCA 26
A 1995 case set the test for criminal recklessness in Victoria as awareness of the accused that serious injury would probably result4. Later amendments were silent on the test to be applied. The test in NSW required only a possibility in this regard, and the High Court later also …
Sydney Seaplanes v Page [2021] NSWCA 204
A woman died in a plane crash in 2017. Less than 2 years later (just within the limitation period), her father sued the operator for damages in the FCA. This was dismissed, as the flight was wholly within NSW. To re-start in the NSWSC, there had to be ‘an order of a federal …
Genesian Theatre v NSW [2021] NSWSC 1089
Paula Bate said many times she wanted to leave everything to the theatre. There was no dispute about this, but she never made a will. She died, her estate vested in the State, and the theatre tried to claim it – refused. The issue was whether the theatre as a corporation was a …
AAI Limited v Technology Swiss [2021] FCAFC 168
This insurance case (at [163]) stresses that the meaning of a contract has nothing to do with subjective intentions of the parties. The High Court case quoted from, Byrnes v Kendall, makes parallel observations for statutes13. From every angle, interpretation in both spheres is to be objective.
With statutes, …
Thaler v Commissioner of Patents [2021] FCA 879
On the use of dictionaries to resolve the meaning of ‘inventor’, Beach J in Thaler (at [15]) said more was required than ‘mere resort to old millennium usages’. If words are only ‘pictures of ideas’, the judge needed ‘to grapple with the underlying idea’.
The judge (at [147-153) noted – (1) choice …
King Eeducational v CEO (No 3) [2021] FCA 692
This case deals with an amended provision requiring a decision-maker to be satisfied the applicant ‘is complying, or will comply’ with conditions8. The contextual meaning of ‘and’ and ‘or’ is discussed9.
Also dealt with is a ‘changes in style’ argument that, because the amended provision ‘appears to …
WorkPac Pty Ltd v Rossato [2021] HCA 23
Interpretation and characterisation go hand-in-hand in legal work. It is one thing to say what a statutory term means, but quite another to determine whether something meets that description.
If R had a ‘reasonable expectation of continuing employment’11, he could request a change from casual to permanent status. But he …
Ke v R [2021] NSWCCA 177
It has long been true that, where one interpretation will do manifest injustice and another will avoid it, the latter should be adopted13. This is an instance of consequences being taken into account. Ke pleaded guilty to recklessly dealing with proceeds of crime (funds derived from stolen baby formula)14. It …
LibertyWorks Inc v Cth [2021] FCAFC 90
A private think-tank challenged a COVID overseas travel ban made under laws to prevent the spread of disease3. It said its members should not be subjected to a measure a named individual could not be. Also, the ban could only cover domestic movements – cf s 21(1)(b) of the Acts Interpretation …
Coleman v Caesarstone Australia [2021] QSC 125
This is a rare case where words were added into legislation7. A stonemason contracted accelerated silicosis and later depression caused by that disease. Proceedings for a ‘personal injury that is a dust-related condition’ are fast-tracked due to the low life expectancy of sufferers8. Did he have to maintain separate …
