Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: Minister for Home Affairs and Justice v. Adamas & Anor
Date: 28 November 2013
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 3h 34m
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
Cases:
Date: 27 November 2013
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 3h 55m
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: The Ship Go Star v. Daebo International Shipping Co Ltd
Date: 26 November 2013
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 1h 05m
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.
FTZK v. Minister for Immigration and Border Protection and Anor
Case No.
M143/2013
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
6/05/2013 Federal Court of Australia (Gray J, Dodds-Streeton J, Kerr J)
Catchwords
Administrative law - Jurisdictional error - Appellant asylum seeker accused of involvement in kidnapping-murder while in China - Appellant argued accusation motivated by appellant's religious practices - Administrative Appeals Tribunal ("AAT") found appellant's account and conduct subsequent accusation constituted "serious reasons" for considering appellant had committed a serious political crime - AAT therefore found that Refugee Convention did not apply - Whether decision of AAT took into account irrelevant considerations - Whether decision affected by jurisdictional error.
Documents
08/11/2013 Hearing (SLA, Melbourne)
22/11/2013 Notice of appeal
04/12/2013 Submitting appearance (Second Respondent)
13/12/2013 Written submissions (Appellant)
13/12/2013 Chronology (Appellant)
14/01/2014 Written submissions (First Respondent)
28/01/2014 Reply
18/02/2014 Consent order changing name of First Respondent
11/03/2014 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
27/06/2014 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Achurch v. The Queen
Case No.
S276/2013
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
22/05/2013 Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court of Criminal Appeal) (Bathurst CJ, McClellan JA, Johnson J, Garling J, Bellew J)
Catchwords
Criminal law – Sentencing – Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) (“the Act”) – Appellant convicted of drugs offences in 2008 sentenced to non-parole period of 6 years – Crown appeal against sentence successful and non-parole period increased to 13 years – Court of Criminal Appeal held trial judge had erred in approach to sentencing – Court of Criminal Appeal issued new sentence in line with R v Way; R v Sellars; and R v Knight – Two months after successful crown appeal High Court handed down judgment holding that Way; Sellars; and Knight wrongly decided – Whether sentence imposed contrary to law per s 43(1)(a) of the Act – Whether appropriate that s 43(1)(a) be used as proxy for an appeal.
Documents
08/11/2013 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
22/11/2013 Notice of appeal
13/12/2013 Written submissions (Appellant)
13/12/2013 Chronology (Appellant)
16/01/2014 Written submissions (Respondent)
29/01/2014 Reply
13/02/2014 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
02/04/2014 Judgment (Judgment summary)