Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: Vella & Ors v. Commissioner of Police (NSW) & Anor
Date: 06 August 2019
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 4h 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.
Commonwealth of Australia v. Helicopter Resources Pty Ltd & Ors
Case No.
S217/2019
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
15/02/2019 Federal Court of Australia (Rares, McKerracher, & Robertson JJ)
Catchwords
Evidence – Admissions made with authority – Where coronial inquest commenced and summary criminal proceedings brought against company and Commonwealth of Australia – Where subpoena issued to company’s employee to give evidence at hearing in inquest, with proposed topics relating to matters required to be proved in criminal prosecution – Whether s 87(1)(b) of Evidence Act 2011 (ACT) has effect that, by reason of any answers given by employee, company is itself being compelled to provide that information – Whether s 87(1)(b) dictates that employee answers will be admitted into evidence in prosecution if adduced by prosecutor or co-accused – Whether s 87(1)(b) has effect that exercise of compulsory power with respect to employee will compromise protections afforded to accused company by accusatorial process – Whether accusatorial principle require accused company to be protected by precluding employees from being subject to such compulsory power or preventing prosecution or co-accused from learning how accused company may defend charge – Whether compulsory attendance of employee for questioning is inconsistent with accusatorial process.
Documents
21/06/2019 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
05/07/2019 Notice of appeal
02/08/2019 Amended Notice of appeal
05/08/2019 Written submissions (Appellant)
05/08/2019 Chronology (Appellant)
05/09/2019 Written submissions (First respondent)
26/09/2019 Reply
10/10/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording) - Part heard
10/10/2019 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)
10/10/2019 Outline of oral argument (First Respondent)
30/01/2019 Written submissions on the notice of contention (Appellant)
05/02/2020 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
05/02/2020 Outline of oral argument (Appellant addressing notice of contention)
24/04/2020 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Franz Boensch as trustee of the Boensch Trust v. Pascoe
Case No.
S216/2019
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
20/12/2018 Federal Court of Australia (Besanko J, Mckerracher J, Gleeson J)
Catchwords
Trusts – Bankruptcy – Where respondent trustee in bankruptcy found to hold caveatable interest in real property held by bankrupt on trust by operation of s 58(1) of Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – Whether Full Court erred in concluding any caveatable interest vested in respondent – Where claim under s 74P of Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) for compensation in relation to lodging and maintenance of caveat over piece of real property against trustee in bankruptcy – Whether it was permissible for trustee in bankruptcy to claim in his caveat under s 74P(1) of Real Property Act inconsistent interests in Rydalmere property – Whether existence of caveatable interest rendered it unnecessary for Court to embark upon enquiry of whether trustee in bankruptcy lodged caveat, or failed or refused to remove it, “without reasonable cause”.
Documents
21/06/2019 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
04/07/2019 Notice of appeal
09/08/2019 Written submissions (Appellant)
09/08/2019 Chronology (Appellant)
09/09/2019 Written submissions (Respondent)
27/09/2019 Reply
11/10/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
11/10/2019 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)
11/10/2019 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)
13/12/2019 Judgment (Judgment summary)
State of Western Australia v. Manado on behalf of the Bindunbur Native Title Claim Group & Ors
State of Western Australia v. Augustine on behalf of the Jabirr Jabirr / Ngumbarl Native Title Claim Group & Ors
Commonwealth of Australia v. Augustine on behalf of the Jabirr Jabirr / Ngumbarl Native Title Claim Group & Ors
Commonwealth of Australia v. Manado on behalf of the Bindunbur Native Title Claim Group & Ors
Case Nos.
P34/2019, P35/2019, P36/2019; P37/2019
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
20/12/2018 Federal Court of Australia (Barker, Perry & Charlesworth JJ)
Catchwords
Native title – Native title interest – Determinations of native title – Whether Full Federal Court erred in holding that existing public access to and enjoyment of waterways, beds and banks or foreshores of waterways, coastal waters or beaches located upon Crown land below high water mark, confirmed by s 14 of Titles (Validation) and Native Title (Effect of Past Acts) Act 1995 (WA) in accordance with s 212(2) of Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), was not a right or privilege in connection with land or waters within the definition of "interest" in s 253 of Native Title Act – Whether, to be included in determination of native title, is it necessary for public access and enjoyment to be an "interest", as defined in s 253 of Native Title Act – Whether existing public access to and enjoyment of waterways, beds and banks or foreshores of waterways, coastal waters or beaches located on unallocated Crown land should be stated in a determination of native title made in accordance with s 225 of Native Title Act.
Documents*
21/06/2019 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
05/07/2019 Notices of appeal
21/08/2019 Written submissions (State of Western Australia)
21/08/2019 Chronology (State of Western Australia)
21/08/2019 Written submissions (Commonwealth of Australia)
21/08/2019 Chronology (Commonwealth of Australia)
13/09/2019 Written submissions (Native Title Claim Groups for the State of Western Australia appeals)
13/09/2019 Written submissions (Native Title Claim Groups for the Commonwealth of Australia)
13/09/2019 Joint chronology (Native Title Claim Groups)
04/10/2019 Reply (Commonwealth of Australia)
08/10/2019 Reply (State of Western Australia)
03/12/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
03/12/2019 Outline of oral argument (Commonwealth of Australia)
03/12/2019 Outline of oral argument (State of Western Australia)
03/12/2019 Outline of oral argument (Native Title Claim Groups)
18/03/2020 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: Taylor v. Attorney-General of the Commonwealth
Date: 19 June 2019
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 1h 56m
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.