Huxley v. The Queen
Case No.
Case no B19/2023
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
23 April 2021 Supreme Court of Queensland (Court of Appeal) (Fraser, Morrison and Mullins JJA)
Catchwords
Criminal practice – Jury direction – Witness evidence – Joint trial – Where appellant convicted by jury for murder after being charged on joint indictment which charged three others – Where direction given to jury in relation to witness' evidence - Where witness' evidence central to co-accused's case and relevant to appellant's – Where direction made that jury should only act upon witness' evidence if satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that evidence truthful, reliable and accurate – Whether jury direction, that witness' evidence in joint trial can only be used by jury if satisfied evidence of witness truthful, reliable and accurate beyond reasonable doubt, constituted miscarriage of justice.
Documents*
17/03/2023 Hearing (SLA, Canberra by video-connection)
29/03/2023 Notice of appeal
12/05/2023 Written submissions (Appellant)
12/05/2023 Chronology (Appellant)
09/06/2023 Written submissions (Respondent)
30/06/2023 Reply
07/09/2023 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
07/09/2023 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)
07/09/2023 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)
06/12/2023 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: YOUNG & ANOR V CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (HOUSING)
Date: 16 March 2023
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 3h 48m
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.
Redland City Council v. Kozik & Ors
Case No.
Case no B17/2023
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
26/08/2022 Supreme Court of Queensland (Court of Appeal) (McMurdo JA, Boddice and Callaghan JJ)
Catchwords
Restitution – Unjust enrichment – Payment of public impost – Mistake of law – Restitutionary defence in public law – Where respondents plaintiffs in representative action against appellant seeking recovery of monies paid as ratepayers for charges wrongly levied by appellant – Where appellant accepts charges wrongly levied, but refuses to repay amount of charges expended for particular benefit of group of ratepayers – Where primary judge held appellant unable to raise restitutionary defences in circumstances where plaintiffs' claims brought as cause of action in debt and no contractual relationship arose – Where Court of Appeal majority found restitution claims available in circumstances where monies paid under invalid laws, but that ratepayers could not be considered to be unjustly enriched by repayment of monies – Whether defence of unjust enrichment available where payment of public impost made under mistake of law – Whether defence of unjust enrichment available where, though wrongly levied, charges expended to special benefit of group – Whether defence of unjust enrichment to be framed by reference to contractual principles of failure of consideration or by reference to material benefit derived.
Documents*
17/03/2023 Hearing (SLA, Canberra by video connection)
27/03/2023 Notice of appeal
05/05/2023 Written submissions (Appellant)
05/05/2023 Chronology (Appellant)
02/06/2023 Written submissions (Respondents)
23/06/2023 Written submissions (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth of Australia, intervening)
23/06/2023 Written submissions (Attorney-General of the State of Queensland, intervening)
30/06/2023 Reply
13/09/2023 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
12/09/2023 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)
13/09/2023 Outline of oral argument (Respondents)
13/09/2023 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth of Australia, intervening)
13/09/2023 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General of the State of Queensland, intervening)
14/09/2023 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
13/03/2024 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: ENT19 V MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS & ANOR
Date: 15 March 2023
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 1h 25m
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: ENT19 V MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS & ANOR
Date: 14 March 2023
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 2h 01m
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.