DPP v Whittle [2023] ACTSC 64
Was the offence of possessing prohibited firearms one that ‘relates to money or other property’ under s 375(1)(b)(i) of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)? The answer was ‘not obvious’. In selecting the interpretation that best achieved the purpose of the provisions, Mossop J (at [18-19]) emphasised 3 key things.
First, purpose is to be …
Kingdom of Spain v ISL SÀRL [2023] HCA 11
In this foreign state immunity case, the High Court considers 4 key principles of treaty interpretation.
One, statutory provisions are to be interpreted consistently with international law11. Two, treaties should have the same meaning in all party states12. The Vienna Convention on treaty interpretation applies rather than …
R v Clark [2023] SASCA 15 (at [14])4
Section 20 of the Legislation Interpretation Act 2021 (SA) says that an example included in legislation ‘is not exhaustive’ and ‘may extend, but does not limit, the meaning of the provision …to which it relates’5.
The word ‘may’ allows a court to assess if an example in fact extends …
Application by Ellasil Pty Ltd [2023] VSC 69
This case (at [88]) explains how superannuation trust deeds are to be interpreted. Unsurprisingly, they are to be read in the same practical, objective and purposive way as all commercial documents9.
McMillan J said that attention must to be paid to the language used, commercial circumstances, operational context, and the …
NL v Chief Executive DFCP [2023] SASCA 20
Delegated legislation is invalid if it is inconsistent with the statute under which it is made12. As the court explained (at [118-123]), inconsistency may involve direct collision between the two, or may arise where the statute is ‘plainly intended’ to ‘cover the field’13 – that is, where the statute …
Attorney General v FJG [2023] NSWCA 34
In this case, Bell CJ (at [1]) observes that interpretation should never start from some preconceived policy outcome considered desirable then ‘work backwards’. Preconception may be unconscious just as much as deliberate. Within our purposive system, it is a particular problem that appellate courts have been concerned to call out15.
Could …
Odisho v Central Coast Council [2023] NSWLEC 1017
When meaning is at stake, a natural inclination may be to call in an expert. But, while experts might give evidence on the technical meaning of non-legal words4, their views on ordinary meaning of words are inadmissible5. This case makes an even bigger point.
At issue was the …
Sunsie Pty Ltd v KDD [2023] WASC 18
S pre-paid $380K to an agent in relation to purchase of a unit; the agent gave it to the developer before strata plan registration; the project failed; the agent claimed the money was a loan, not part of the price.
Archer J held the money was recoverable under strata title provisions preventing …
Case (pseudonym) v The King [2023] VSCA 12
C was convicted in Victoria of involving another in production of child abuse material – s 51B of the Crimes Act 1958. While in SA, he phoned someone in Victoria giving step-by-step instructions about what was to occur. Related provisions had extraterritorial effect, but not s 51B. C argued this meant …
NDIA v Foster [2023] FCAFC 11
F needed a catheter to urinate – did he meet access rules to become an NDIS ‘participant’14? He said that ‘effectively or completely’ in the context of his ability to participate in self-care activities took its ordinary meaning without regard to extrinsic materials.
The court (at [31]) rejected this. The notion these …
