Insight Vacations Pty Ltd t/a Insight Vacations v. Young
Case No.
S273/2010
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
11/06/2010 Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court of Appeal)(Spigelman CJ, Basten JA, Sackville AJA)
Catchwords
Trade and commerce — Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (“TPA”) and related legislation — Consumer protection — Conditions and warranties in consumer transactions — Warranties — Whether s 74(2A) of TPA applies to State law authorising contractual provision limiting or precluding liability for breach of implied warranty of due care and skill in s 74(1) of TPA — Whether s 74(2A) of TPA only applies to State laws which limit or preclude liability for breach of implied warranty in s 74(1) of TPA by their own terms — Whether s 74(2A) of TPA picks up and applies s 5N(1) of Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) (“CLA”) — Whether exclusion clause authorised by s 5N of CLA is contract term purporting to exclude, restrict or modify application of s 74(1) of TPA, within meaning of s 68 of TPA — Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), ss 68 and 74(2A) — Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s 5N.
Documents
12/11/2010 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
03/12/2010 Notice of appeal
03/12/2010 Notice of constitutional matter (Appellant)
01/02/2011 Written submissions (Appellant)
01/02/2011 Chronology
15/02/2011 Written submissions (Respondent)
22/02/2011 Written submissions (Attorney-General for New South Wales intervening)
01/03/2011 Reply
01/04/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)
11/05/2011 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Equuscorp Pty Ltd (formerly Equus Financial Services Ltd) v. Haxton (M128/2010)
Equuscorp Pty Ltd (formerly Equus Financial Services Ltd) v. Bassat (M129/2010)
Equuscorp Pty Ltd (formerly Equus Financial Services Ltd) v. Cunningham’s Warehouse Sales Pty Ltd (M130, M131 & M132/2010)
Case Nos.
M128/2010
M129/2010
M130-132/2010
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
29/01/2010 Supreme Court of Victoria (Court of Appeal)(Ashley J, Neave J, Dodds-Streeton J)
Catchwords
Restitution — Restitution resulting from unenforceable, incomplete, illegal or void contracts — Recovery of money paid or property transferred — Respondents investors in tax driven blueberry farming schemes — Funds for farm management fees lent to investors by Rural Finance Ltd (“Rural”) — Applicant lent money to Rural — Rural subsequently wound up — Loan contracts between respondents and Rural assigned to applicant — Applicant’s enforcement of contractual debts statute-barred — Where parties agreed in court below loan contracts illegal and unenforceable — Whether total failure of consideration — Whether respondents’ retention of loan funds “unjust”.
Restitution — Assignment of rights of restitution — Where Deed of Assignment assigning Rural’s loans to applicant included assignment of “legal right to such debts … and all legal and other remedies” — Whether rights of restitution able to be assigned — Whether rights of restitution assigned in this case.
Documents
03/09/2010 Hearing (SLA, Melbourne)
22/09/2010 Notice of appeal
01/02/2011 Written submissions & chronology - M128/2010 Haxton (Appellant)
01/02/2011 Written submissions & chronology - M129/2010 Bassat (Appellant)
01/02/2011 Written submissions & chronology - M130/2010 Cunningham's (Appellant)
01/02/2011 Written submissions & chronology - M131/2010 Cunningham's (Appellant)
01/02/2011 Written submissions & chronology - M132/2010 Cunningham's (Appellant)
15/02/2011 Written submissions - M128/2010 Haxton (Respondent)
15/02/2011 Written submissions - M129/2010 Bassat (Respondent)
15/02/2011 Written submissions - M130/2010 Cunningham's (Respondent)
15/02/2011 Written submissions - M131/2010 Cunningham's (Respondent)
15/02/2011 Written submissions - M132/2010 Cunningham's (Respondent)
22/02/2011 Reply - M128/2010
22/02/2011 Reply - M129/2010
22/02/2011 Reply - M130/2010
22/02/2011 Reply - M131/2010
22/02/2011 Reply - M132/2010
09/03/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)
10/03/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)
08/03/2012 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions v. Poniatowska
Case No.
A20/2010
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
2/08/2010 Supreme Court of South Australia(Doyle CJ, Duggan J, Sulan J)
Catchwords
Criminal law — Offences — Obtain financial advantage from Commonwealth, knowing of lack of entitlement: s 135.2 Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) — Respondent failed to declare $71,000 in commission payments while receiving parenting benefit from Centrelink — Whether omitting to perform act a physical element of offence — Whether existence of legal duty or obligation to perform act, imposed by offence provision or other Commonwealth statute, determinative of question about physical element — Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) ss 4.3 and 135.2.
Words and phrases — “engages in conduct”.
Documents
16/08/2010 Application for special leave to appeal
12/11/2010 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
01/02/2011 Written submissions (Applicant)
01/02/2011 Chronology
15/02/2011 Written submissions (Respondent)
22/02/2011 Reply
03/03/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)
26/10/2011 Judgment (Judgment summary)
White v. Director of Public Prosecutions for the State of Western Australia
Case No.
P44/2010
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
12/03/2010 Supreme Court of Western Australia (Court of Appeal)(McClure J, Owen, J Buss J)
Catchwords
Criminal law — Procedure — Confiscation of proceeds of crime and related matters — Restraining or freezing order — Where applicants did not own and have effective control of property where offences committed — Where freezing orders made over applicants’ property in place of property where offences took place: Criminal Property Confiscation Act 2000 (WA) (“the Act”) s 22 — Whether property where offences took place was “crime-used” property as defined by s 146 of the Act — Scope of court’s power to set aside a freezing order under s 82 of the Act — Criminal Property Confiscation Act 2000 (WA) s 22.
Words and phrases — “crime-used”, “criminal use”.
Documents
21/10/2010 Hearing (SLA, Perth)
10/11/2010 Notice of appeal
01/02/2011 Written submissions (Appellant)
01/02/2011 Chronology
15/02/2011 Written submissions (Respondent)
22/02/2011 Reply
04/03/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)
08/06/2011 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v. Lanepoint Enterprises Pty Ltd (ACN 110 693 251) (Receivers and Managers Appointed)
Case No.
P43/2010
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
24/05/2010 Federal Court of Australia(North J, Siopis J, Buchanan J)
Catchwords
Corporations — Winding up — Winding up in insolvency — Where respondent presumed to be insolvent once receiver was appointed: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 459C — Where respondent required to rebut presumption in an application for winding up in insolvency — Respondent disputed extent of indebtedness — Whether company should be wound-up on basis of disputed debt — Whether court may determine merits of disputed debt in course of winding up proceeding.
Documents
21/10/2010 Hearing (SLA, Perth)
08/11/2010 Notice of appeal
31/01/2011 Written submissions (Appellant)
31/01/2011 Chronology
15/02/2011 Written submissions (Respondent)
22/02/2011 Reply
08/03/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)
16/03/2011 Further submissions (Respondent)
22/03/2011 Reply supplementary submissions (Appellant)
01/06/2011 Judgment (Judgment summary)