Commissioner of Taxation for the Commonwealth of Australia v. Tomaras & Ors
Case No.
B9/2018
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
13/10/2017 Family Court of Australia (Thackray, Strickland & Aldridge JJ)
Catchwords
Interpretation – Crown immunity – Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 90AE – Presumption that statutory provisions expressed in general terms do not bind Crown – Where wife commenced proceedings against husband seeking alteration of property interests including order under s 90AE substituting husband for wife in respect of indebtedness to Commissioner – Where Full Family Court held s 90AE conferred power to make order – Whether Full Family Court erred in concluding presumption Crown not bound by statute did not apply in construction of s 90AE – If yes, whether Full Family Court erred in concluding presumption would have been rebutted – Whether Full Family Court erred in failing to conclude neither Commissioner nor Commonwealth “creditor” or “third party” for purposes of s 90AE.
Documents
23/03/2018 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
05/04/2018 Notice of appeal
11/05/2018 Written submissions (Appellant)
11/05/2018 Chronology (Appellant)
18/06/2018 Written submissions (Respondents)
09/07/2018 Reply (Appellant)
10/08/2018 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
10/08/2018 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)
10/08/2018 Outline of oral argument (Respondents)
13/12/2018 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Clubb v. Edwards & Anor
Case No.
M46/2018
Related matter:
H2/2018 - Preston v. Avery & Anor
Case Information
Catchwords
Constitutional law – Implied freedom of political communication – Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 (Vic) s 185D – Where s 185D prohibits engaging in “prohibited behaviour” within “safe access zone” – Where “prohibited behaviour” defined to include “communicating by any means in relation to abortions in a manner that is able to be seen or heard by a person accessing, or attempting to access, or leaving premises at which abortions are provided and is reasonably likely to cause distress or anxiety” – Where appellant convicted of charge under s 185D in Magistrates’ Court – Whether 185D impermissibly burdens implied freedom of political communication.
Documents*
23/03/2018 Hearing (Single Justice, Melbourne V/link Adelaide and Hobart)
03/04/2018 Cause removed
04/04/2018 Notice of constitutional matter (Ms Clubb)
11/05/2018 Written submissions (Attorney-General for the State of Victoria)
11/05/2018 Chronology (Attorney-General for the State of Victoria)
18/05/2018 Written submissions (Ms Edwards)
18/05/2018 Chronology (Ms Edwards)
25/05/2018 Written submissions (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth intervening)
25/05/2018 Written submissions (Attorney-General for the State of New South Wales intervening)
25/05/2018 Written submissions (Attorney-General of the State of Queensland intervening)
25/05/2018 Written submissions (Attorney-General for the State of Western Australia intervening)
25/05/2018 Written submissions (Attorney-General for the State of South Australia intervening)
25/05/2018 Written submissions (Human Rights Law Centre seeking leave to appear as amicus curiae)
25/05/2018 Written submissions (Castan Centre for Human Rights Law seeking leave to appear as amicus curiae)
25/05/2018 Written submissions (Fertility Control Clinic seeking leave to intervene or appear as amicus curiae)
08/06/2018 Written submissions (Ms Clubb)
22/06/2018 Reply (Attorney-General for the State of Victoria)
22/06/2018 Reply (Ms Edwards)
28/08/2018 Order granting leave to appear as amicus curiae limited to the written submissions
31/08/2018 Written submissions (Access Zone Action Group seeking leave to appear as amicus curiae)
12/09/2018 Hearing (Single Justice, Canberra)
08/10/2018 Supplementary written submissions (Ms Clubb)
09/10/2018 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
09/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Ms Clubb)
09/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Ms Edwards)
09/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General for the State of Victoria)
10/10/2018 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
10/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth intervening)
11/10/2018 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
11/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-Genearl of the State of Queensland intervening)
11/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General for the State of South Australia intervening)
11/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General for the State of Western Australia intervening)
11/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General for the State of New South Wales intervening)
10/04/2019 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Preston v. Avery & Anor
Case No.
H2/2018
Related matter:
M46/2018 – Clubb v. Edwards & Anor
Case Information
Catchwords
Constitutional law – Implied freedom of political communication – Reproductive Health (Access to Termination) Act 2013 (Tas) s 9(2) – Where s 9(2) prohibits protest in relation to terminations that is able to be seen or heard by person accessing or attempting to access premises at which terminations provided – Where appellant convicted in Hobart Court of Petty Sessions of contraventions of s 9(2) – Whether s 9(2) impermissibly burdens implied freedom of political communication.
Documents*
23/03/2018 Hearing (Single Justice, Melbourne V/link Adelaide and Hobart)
05/04/2018 Cause removed
06/04/2018 Amended notice of appeal
06/04/2018 Notice of Constitutional Matter (Mr Preston)
06/07/2018 Written submissions (Mr Preston)
06/07/2018 Chronology (Mr Preston)
20/07/2018 Written submissions (Liberty Works Inc seeking leave to be heard as amicus curiae)
03/08/2018 Written submissions (Ms Avery & Mr Wilkie)
10/08/2018 Written submissions (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth intervening)
10/08/2018 Written submissions (Attorney-General for the State of New South Wales intervening)
10/08/2018 Written submissions (Attorney-General of the State of Queensland intervening)
10/08/2018 Written submissions (Attorney-General for the State of Victoria intervening)
10/08/2018 Written submissions (Attorney-General for the Northern Territory intervening)
10/08/2018 Written submissions (Attorney-General for the State of Western Australia intervening)
17/08/2018 Reply
28/08/2018 Order granting leave to appear as amicus curiae on written submissions
08/10/2018 Supplementary written submissions (Mr Preston)
09/10/2018 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
09/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Mr Preston)
10/10/2018 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
10/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Ms Avery & Mr Wilkie)
10/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth intervening)
11/10/2018 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
11/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General of the State of Queensland intervening)
11/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General for the State of South Australia intervening)
11/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General for the State of Western Australia intervening)
11/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General for the State of New South Wales intervening)
11/10/2018 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General for the Northern Territory intervening)
19/10/2018 Supplementary submissions (Mr Preston)
24/10/2018 Supplementary submissions (Ms Avery & Mr Wilkie)
10/04/2019 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: The Queen v. Falzon
Date: 19 April 2018
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 1h 07m
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
Case: UBS AG v. Tyne as Trustee of the Argot Trust & Anor
Date: 18 April 2018
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 2h 33m
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.