Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra

Case: Korda & Ors v. Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Limited

Date: 6 November 2014

Transcript: Hearing

AV time: 4h 50m

 

You accept the terms of use (below) by playing this audio-visual recording.

 

 

Terms of use

Access to the audio-visual recordings of the Court is subject to the following conditions:

(1) You will not record, copy, modify, reproduce, publish, republish, upload, post, transmit, broadcast, rebroadcast, store, distribute or otherwise make available, in any manner, any proceeding or part of any proceeding, other than with prior written approval of the Court.  However, schools and universities may broadcast/rebroadcast proceedings in a classroom setting for educational purposes without prior written approval.

(2) The audio-visual material available via our web-site of Court proceedings does not constitute the official record of the Court.

(3) Copyright of the footage of the proceedings is retained by the Court.

By clicking "play" (the triangle controls on the video player), you agree to be bound by these terms of use.

 

Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra

Cases:

Date: 5 November 2014

Transcript: Hearing

AV time: 4h 03m

 

You accept the terms of use (below) by playing this audio-visual recording.

 

 

Terms of use

Access to the audio-visual recordings of the Court is subject to the following conditions:

(1) You will not record, copy, modify, reproduce, publish, republish, upload, post, transmit, broadcast, rebroadcast, store, distribute or otherwise make available, in any manner, any proceeding or part of any proceeding, other than with prior written approval of the Court.  However, schools and universities may broadcast/rebroadcast proceedings in a classroom setting for educational purposes without prior written approval.

(2) The audio-visual material available via our web-site of Court proceedings does not constitute the official record of the Court.

(3) Copyright of the footage of the proceedings is retained by the Court.

By clicking "play" (the triangle controls on the video player), you agree to be bound by these terms of use.

 

Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra

Cases:

Date: 4 November 2014

Transcript: Hearing

AV time: 2h 00m

 

You accept the terms of use (below) by playing this audio-visual recording.

 

 

Terms of use

Access to the audio-visual recordings of the Court is subject to the following conditions:

(1) You will not record, copy, modify, reproduce, publish, republish, upload, post, transmit, broadcast, rebroadcast, store, distribute or otherwise make available, in any manner, any proceeding or part of any proceeding, other than with prior written approval of the Court.  However, schools and universities may broadcast/rebroadcast proceedings in a classroom setting for educational purposes without prior written approval.

(2) The audio-visual material available via our web-site of Court proceedings does not constitute the official record of the Court.

(3) Copyright of the footage of the proceedings is retained by the Court.

By clicking "play" (the triangle controls on the video player), you agree to be bound by these terms of use.

 

 Uelese v. Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor

Case No.

S277/2014

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

8/08/2013 Federal Court of Australia (Jagot, Griffiths, Davies JJ)

[2013] FCAFC 86

Catchwords

Migration – Application of s 500(6H) of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (“Act”) – Appellant’s visa was cancelled – In deciding whether to affirm Minister’s decision, Administrative Affairs Tribunal (AAT) was required to take into account best interests of minor children in Australia – AAT declined to consider or make determination as to best interests of two of appellant’s children – Information as to those children was not adduced by appellant but was apparent from documents tendered by first respondent – Whether Full Court erred in failing to find jurisdictional error in decision of AAT holding that s 500(6H) of Act prohibited AAT from having regard to information concerning two of appellant’s children unless appellant had set out information in written statement to first respondent at least two days before hearing – Whether Full Court erred in failing to find jurisdictional error in AAT holding that date upon which AAT “holds a hearing” for purposes of ss 500(6H) and 500(6I) of Act is first day of any such hearing, and does not include date upon which adjourned hearing is resumed.

Documents*

17/10/2014 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)

31/10/2014 Notice of appeal

05/11/2014 Submitting appearance (Second Respondent)

21/11/2014 Written submissions (Appellant)

21/11/2014 Chronology (Appellant)

12/12/2014 Written submissions (First Respondent)

09/01/2015 Reply

06/03/2015 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)

*The due dates shown for documents on this page are indicative only. 

 Fortress Credit Corporation (Australia) II Pty Limited  & Anor v. William John Fletcher and Katherine Barnet as Liquidators of Octaviar Limited (Receiver and Managers Appointed) (In Liquidation) and Octaviar Administration Pty Limited & Ors

Case No.

S276/2014

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

14/05/2014 Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court of Appeal) (Bathurst CJ, Beazley P, Macfarlan JA, Barrett JA and Gleeson JA)

[2014] NSWCA 148

Catchwords

Corporations law – Insolvency – Voidable transactions – Extension of time – Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (“Act”) – First respondents were appointed liquidators of second and third respondents – Liquidators granted extension under s 588FF(3)(b) to make applications under s 588FF(1) (“shelf order”) – Liquidators brought proceedings seeking relief under s 588FF(1) against appellants with respect to certain transactions between appellants and second and third respondents – Liquidators sought to have shelf order reheard as against appellants and varied so extension of time for bringing claims applied to appellants – Appellants sought to have themselves excluded from operation of shelf order – Whether Court had power under s 588FF(3)(b) of Act to make order extending time for liquidator to make application under s 588FF(1), by reference to, or capable of comprehending, transactions that are neither known nor identified as possible subject of an application under s 588FF(1). 

Short Particulars

Documents

17/10/2014 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)

30/10/2014 Notice of appeal

07/11/2014 Written submissions (Appellants)

07/11/2014 Chronology (Appellants)

21/11/2014 Written submissions (Respondents)

28/11/2014 Reply

11/12/2014 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

Page 4 of 66