Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Cases:
- Commissioner of State Revenue v. Lend Lease Developments Pty Ltd
- Commissioner of State Revenue v. Lend Lease IMT 2 (HP) Pty Ltd
- Commissioner of State Revenue v. Lend Lease Real Estate Investments Limited
Date: 4 November 2014
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 2h 00m
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.
Uelese v. Minister for Immigration and Citizenship & Anor
Case No.
S277/2014
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
8/08/2013 Federal Court of Australia (Jagot, Griffiths, Davies JJ)
Catchwords
Migration – Application of s 500(6H) of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (“Act”) – Appellant’s visa was cancelled – In deciding whether to affirm Minister’s decision, Administrative Affairs Tribunal (AAT) was required to take into account best interests of minor children in Australia – AAT declined to consider or make determination as to best interests of two of appellant’s children – Information as to those children was not adduced by appellant but was apparent from documents tendered by first respondent – Whether Full Court erred in failing to find jurisdictional error in decision of AAT holding that s 500(6H) of Act prohibited AAT from having regard to information concerning two of appellant’s children unless appellant had set out information in written statement to first respondent at least two days before hearing – Whether Full Court erred in failing to find jurisdictional error in AAT holding that date upon which AAT “holds a hearing” for purposes of ss 500(6H) and 500(6I) of Act is first day of any such hearing, and does not include date upon which adjourned hearing is resumed.
Documents
17/10/2014 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
31/10/2014 Notice of appeal
05/11/2014 Submitting appearance (Second Respondent)
21/11/2014 Written submissions (Appellant)
21/11/2014 Chronology (Appellant)
12/12/2014 Written submissions (First Respondent)
19/12/2014 Reply
06/03/2015 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
06/05/2015 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Fortress Credit Corporation (Australia) II Pty Limited & Anor v. William John Fletcher and Katherine Barnet as Liquidators of Octaviar Limited (Receiver and Managers Appointed) (In Liquidation) and Octaviar Administration Pty Limited & Ors
Case No.
S276/2014
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
14/05/2014 Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court of Appeal) (Bathurst CJ, Beazley P, Macfarlan JA, Barrett JA and Gleeson JA)
Catchwords
Corporations law – Insolvency – Voidable transactions – Extension of time – Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (“Act”) – First respondents were appointed liquidators of second and third respondents – Liquidators granted extension under s 588FF(3)(b) to make applications under s 588FF(1) (“shelf order”) – Liquidators brought proceedings seeking relief under s 588FF(1) against appellants with respect to certain transactions between appellants and second and third respondents – Liquidators sought to have shelf order reheard as against appellants and varied so extension of time for bringing claims applied to appellants – Appellants sought to have themselves excluded from operation of shelf order – Whether Court had power under s 588FF(3)(b) of Act to make order extending time for liquidator to make application under s 588FF(1), by reference to, or capable of comprehending, transactions that are neither known nor identified as possible subject of an application under s 588FF(1).
Documents
17/10/2014 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
30/10/2014 Notice of appeal
07/11/2014 Written submissions (Appellants)
07/11/2014 Chronology (Appellants)
21/11/2014 Written submissions (Respondents)
28/11/2014 Reply
11/12/2014 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
11/03/2015 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: Henderson v. State of Queensland
Date: 16 October 2014
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 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.
Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: CPCF v. Minister for Immigration and Border Protection & Anor
Date: 15 October 2014
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 4h 08m
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.