The recent ‘ankle bracelet’ challenge in the High Court is an example of the ‘textcontextpurpose’ protocol in practice1. At issue was the validity of punitive curfew restrictions on aliens awaiting deportation, enforced by an ‘electronic monitoring device affixed to the person’2. This applied unless the Minister was satisfied it was not necessary ‘for the …
SkyCity Adelaide v Treasurer [2024] HCA 37
30 years ago, the High Court said it ‘would be quite circular to construe the words of a definition by reference to the term defined’5. Other courts saw this as out-of-step with how we are to read statutes6.
In SkyCity, the court said (at [32]) there is no …
HBSY Pty Ltd v Lewis [2024] HCA 35
In this cross-vesting case, 3 key principles of our interpretation system are touched on – always speaking, statutory harmony and objective enquiry.
On the first 2, Gageler CJ (at [53]) said that legislation is always speaking in the present. Statutes must be construed as currently in force given parliament ‘intends its legislation …
X Corp v eSafety Commissioner [2024] FCA 1159
Whether X Corp (new owner) was subject to online safety penalties imposed on Twitter (old owner) depended on the status of X Corp and whether ‘liabilities’ under Nevada law included regulatory obligations10. Wheelahan J first observed (at [134]) that ‘Australian courts know no foreign law’11.
Foreign law is …
Qube Ports v CFMEU [2024] FCA 132
The issue in this fair work case was whether an enterprise agreement could be varied retroactively to remove ambiguity on application of an employer who was no longer ‘covered by the agreement’12.
Wheelahan J (at [73]) said interpretation ‘requires more than matching up statutory text against pronouncements in books on grammar …
A flier from Maddocks says – ‘It is a little known fact that the answers to life, the universe and everything related to statutory interpretation can be found in the magical text known as the Acts Interpretation Act 1901’. While this may overplay things a little, the AIA does provide many answers to statutory life and navigation of our …
Forrest v WA (No 2) [2024] FCA 729
Jackson J (at [139-140]) comments on how we are to apply ‘rules of construction’ under our system of interpretation3. We tend to assume parliament is some perfect machine and that the legislation it produces is also perfect. This is a false starting point, however, and not how things work out …
Storty [2024] NSWLEC 1397, Salisbury [2024] SASC 92
In Storty, it was said that development consents, as statutory instruments, are interpreted the same way as statutes5. They are to be read in the standard ‘text>context>purpose’ way6, as a whole, and so as not to undermine the statutory scheme in question7. In Salisbury…
Capral Ltd v CGU Insurance [2024] FCA 775
Jackman J (at [63-71]) provides a convenient guide on how insurance contracts are to be read.
(1) Meaning is determined objectively. (2) The perspective of the reasonable businessperson is to be adopted. (3) It is assumed parties intend to ‘produce a commercial result’9. (…
DPP v Smith [2024] HCA 32
After Smith was charged with child sex offences, the judge convened a ‘ground rules hearing’ from which Smith was excluded12. He argued that this infringed his right to a fair and public hearing. This was rejected. It was held there is no absolute rule that an accused must be present throughout their …
