Comptroller-General of Customs v. Pharm-A-Care Laboratories Pty Ltd

Case No.

S161/2019

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

21/12/2018 Federal Court of Australia (Burley J, Steward J, Thawley JJ)

[2018] FCAFC 237

Catchwords

Taxation – Customs and Excise – Tariff classification – Classifying vitamin preparations and garcinia preparations – Medicaments – Whether Full Court erred in holding that the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (“Tribunal”) had not erred in construing Note 1(a) to Chapter 30 of Sch 3 of the Customs Tariff Act 1995 (Cth) (“Act”) – Whether Full Court erred in holding that the Tribunal had not erred in construing heading 2106 of the Act.

Short particulars

Documents

17/05/2019 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)

31/05/2019 Notice of appeal

05/07/2019 Written submissions (Appellant)

05/07/2019 Chronology (Appellant)

02/08/2019 Written submissions (Respondent)

23/08/2019 Reply

14/10/2019 Amended written submissions (Appellant)

17/10/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

17/10/2019 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)

17/10/2019 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)

24/10/2019 Post-hearing note (Appellant)

31/10/2019 Post-hearing note (Respondent)

05/02/2020 Judgment (Judgment summary)

Kadir v. The Queen

Case No.

S160/2019

Related matter:

S163/2019 – Grech v. The Queen

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

30/11/2017 Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court of Criminal Appeal) (Ward JA, Price J, Beech-Jones J)

[2017] NSWCCA 288

Catchwords

Evidence – Discretionary exclusion – Where evidence obtained improperly or illegally – Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) – Whether the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal (“CCA”) erred in finding appealable error in the trial judge’s decision on basis that trial judge did not assess each item of evidence individually – Whether the CCA erred in finding error in trial judge’s finding that s 138 factors governing exclusion of recordings “directly applicable” to other evidence obtained as consequence of illegally obtained recordings – Whether CCA erred in its application of s 138 by failing to apply correctly the onus of proof and taking into account considerations contrary to evidence and failing to take into account material consideration.

Short particulars

Documents

17/05/2019 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)

31/05/2019 Notice of appeal

19/07/2019 Written submissions (Appellant)

25/07/2019 Chronology (Appellant)

01/08/2019 Hearing (Single Justice, Sydney)

02/08/2019 Written submissions (Respondent)

28/08/2019 Reply

15/10/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

15/10/2019 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)

15/10/2019 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)

05/02/2020 Judgment (Judgment summary)

Commissioner of State Revenue v. Rojoda Pty Ltd

Case No.

P26/2019

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

21/12/2018 Supreme Court of Western Australia (Court of Appeal) (Buss P, Murphy & Beech JJA)

[2018] WASCA 224

Catchwords

Taxation – Stamp duty assessment - Partnership – Winding up of partnership – Nature of partners’ proprietary rights in partnership assets – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that after dissolution of partnership but prior to completion of its winding up where surplus of assets each former partner has specific and fixed beneficial or equitable interest in the assets comprising a surplus – Whether cll 3 of two deeds each constituted declarations of trust for the purposes of s 11(1)(c) of the Duties Act 2008 (WA).

Short particulars

Documents*

17/05/2019 Hearing (SLA, Melbourne)

30/05/2019 Notice of appeal

06/06/2019 Notice of contention

12/07/2019 Written submissions (Appellant)

12/07/2019 Chronology (Appellant)

26/08/2019 Written submissions (Respondent)

16/09/2019 Reply and Response to Notice of Contention (Appellant)

14/10/2019 Reply on Notice of contention (Respondent)

06/11/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

06/11/2019 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)

07/11/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

07/11/2019 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)

18/03/2020 Judgment (Judgment summary)

The Queen v. Guode

Case No.

M75/2019

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

16/08/2018 Supreme Court of Victoria (Court of Appeal) (Ferguson CJ, Priest and Beach JJA)

[2018] VSCA 205

Catchwords

Criminal law – Sentencing — Manifest excess – Infanticide, murder and attempted murder — Where mother caused death of three children and attempted to kill fourth — Where mother pled guilty — Where mother had had traumatic life and suffered a major depressive disorder as consequence of giving birth to her youngest child — Whether mother suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder – Whether Court of Appeal erred in taking into account as relevant consideration in making its determination as to manifest excess fact that prosecution had accepted plea to infanticide in respect of Charge 1 on the indictment.

Short particulars

Documents*

17/05/2019 Hearing (SLA, Melbourne)

31/05/2019 Notice of appeal

05/07/2019 Written submissions (Appellant)

05/07/2019 Chronology (Appellant)

02/08/2019 Written submissions (Respondent)

14/11/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

14/11/2019 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)

14/11/2019 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)

18/03/2020 Judgment (Judgment summary)

CNY17 v. Minister for Immigration and Border Protection & Anor

Case No.

M72/2019

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

21/09/2018 Federal Court of Australia (Mortimer J, Moshinsky J & Thawley J)

[2018] FCAFC 159

Catchwords

Migration law – Fast track review process – Apprehended bias – Where Secretary of Department of Immigration and Border Protection provided documents to the Immigration Assessment Authority (“IAA”) – Where the documents contained information about criminal conviction, charges, and appellant’s conduct while in immigration detention – Whether in considering apprehended bias the Full Court erred in finding that materials were not prejudicial – Whether Full Court erred in failing to find decision of IAA vitiated by apprehended bias – Whether Full Court erred in failing to find IAA obliged to afford opportunity to appellant to comment on materials before it in circumstances where their existence not known to appellant - Whether Full Court erred in finding it was open to delegate to lawfully form view documents relevant to task of IAA – Whether Full Court erred in failing to find review conducted by IAA led to a decision made in excess of jurisdiction.

Short particulars

Documents

17/05/2019 Hearing (SLA, Melbourne)

29/05/2019 Notice of appeal

05/07/2019 Written submissions (Appellant)

05/07/2019 Chronology (Appellant)

02/08/2019 Written submissions (First Respondent)

23/08/2019 Reply

16/10/2019 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

16/10/2019 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)

16/10/2019 Outline of oral argument (First Respondent)

24/10/2019 Further submissions (Appellant)

31/10/2019 Further submissions (First Respondent)

04/11/2019 Reply to the first respondent's further submissions (Appellant)

13/12/2019 Judgment (Judgment summary)

Page 90 of 259