Phonographic Performance Company of Australia Limited & Ors v. Commonwealth of Australia & Ors

Case No.

S23/2010

Case Information

Catchwords

Constitutional law — Operation and effect of Commonwealth Constitution — Powers with respect to property — Power to acquire property on just terms — Whether some or all of provisions in ss 109 and 152 of Copyright Act 1986 (Cth) beyond legislative competence of Parliament by reason of s 51(xxxi) of Constitution — If so, whether such provisions should be read down or severed and, if so, how — Constitution, s 51(xxxi) — Copyright Act 1986 (Cth), ss 109 and 152.

Short Particulars

Documents

17/02/2010 Writ of Summons

20/01/2011 Hearing (Single Justice, Sydney)

28/03/2011 Written submissions (Plaintiffs)

28/03/2011 Chronology

19/04/2011 Written submissions (Defendant 1)

19/04/2011 Written submissions (Defendant 2)

19/04/2011 Written submissions (Defendant 3)

26/04/2011 Reply

10/05/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)

11/05/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)

12/05/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)

28/03/2012 Judgment  (Judgment summary)

Peter Nicholas Moloney t/a Moloney & Partners v. Workers Compensation Tribunal and Anor

Case No.

A5/2011

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

2/08/2010 Supreme Court of South Australia(Doyle CJ, Anderson J, Layton J)

[2010] SASCFC 17

Catchwords

Statutes — Subordinate legislation — Validity — Where Workers Rehabilitation Compensation Act 1986 (SA) ("the Act") s 88E(1)(f)  authorised President of Workers Compensation Tribunal to make Rules regulating "costs" — Where s 88G of the Act regulated recovery of costs by worker's representative — Where Workers Compensation Tribunal Rules 2009 r 31(2) restricted recovery of costs by worker's representative — Whether "costs" in s 88E(1)(f) of the Act includes solicitor-client costs or only party-party costs —Whether power conferred by s 88E(1)(f) limited by s 88G of the Act — Whether s 88G invalidates r 31(2) — Workers Rehabilitation Compensation Act 1986 (SA) ss 88E(1)(f), 88G — Workers Compensation Tribunal Rules 2009 r 31(2).

Short Particulars

Documents

11/02/2011 Hearing (SLA, Canberra v/l Adelaide)

24/02/2011 Notice of appeal

11/03/2011 Written submissions (Appellant)

11/03/2011 Chronology (Appellant)

05/04/2011 Written submissions (Second Respondent)

13/04/2011 Reply

28/09/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Adelaide) (Special leave revoked)

Australian Education Union v. Department of Education and Children's Services

Case No.

A4/2011

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

28/05/2010 Supreme Court of South Australia (Nyland J, Gray J, Vanstone J)

[2010] SASC 161

Catchwords

Statutes — Acts of Parliament — Interpretation — Statutory powers and duties — Conferral and extent of power — Particular words and phrases — General matters constrained by specific — Applicants teachers appointed under Education Act 1972 (SA) ("the Act") s 9(4) — Where s 15 of the Act enabled Minister to appoint teachers "officers of the teaching service" — Where s 9(4) of the Act enabled Minister to appoint officers and employees "in addition to" officers of teaching service — Meaning of "in addition to" — Whether general power in s 9(4) constrained by specific power in s 15 — Whether within Minister's power to appoint teachers under s 9(4) of the Act or whether s 15 sole source of Executive power — Education Act 1972 (SA) ss 9(4), 15.

Short Particulars

Documents

11/02/2011 Hearing (SLA, Canberra v/link to Adelaide)

24/02/2011 Notice of appeal

11/03/2011 Written submissions (Appellant)

11/03/2011 Chronology (Appellant)

01/04/2011 Written submissions (Respondent)

08/04/2011 Reply

28/09/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Adelaide)

29/02/2012 Judgment  (Judgment summary)

Michael Wilson & Partners Limited v. Nicholls and Ors

Case No.

S67/2011

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

15/09/2010 Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court of Appeal)(Basten JA, Young JA, Lindgren AJA)

[2010] NSWCA 222

Catchwords

Practice and procedure — Supreme Court procedure — Abuse of process — Applicant obtained judgment against respondents in New South Wales Supreme Court ("NSWSC") for knowing participation in breach of fiduciary duty by a non-party — London arbitrators subsequently issued interim award upholding breach of duties by non-party but denying compensation to applicant ("the Award") — Respondents not party to the Award — Whether abuse of process for applicant to seek to enforce judgment in NSWSC in face of the Award.

Practice and procedure — Courts and judges — Disqualification of judges for interest or bias — Apprehended bias — Application of lay observer test in Johnson v Johnson (2000) 201 CLR 488 — Whether lay observer test "unnecessary" and "wholly artificial" where judge personally apprehends bias — Whether conclusion of New South Wales Court of Appeal on trial judge's apprehensible bias justified on facts.

Practice and procedure — Waiver — Trial judge refused to recuse himself ("the recusal decision") and invited respondents to appeal the recusal decision — Respondents did not appeal the recusal decision until after trial and judgment adverse to respondents delivered — Whether the recusal decision an order or judgment —Whether the recusal decision amenable to appeal — Whether respondents waived right to appeal the recusal decision by proceeding with trial.

Short particulars

Documents

11/02/2011 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)

25/02/2011 Notice of appeal

11/03/2011 Written submissions (Appellant)

11/03/2011 Chronology (Appellant)

08/04/2011 Written submissions (Respondents)

08/04/2011 Chronology (Respondents)

15/04/2011 Reply

31/05/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)

01/06/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)

06/06/2011 Supplementary submissions (Appellant)

16/06/2011 Submissions in reply (Respondents)

01/12/2011 Judgment  (Judgment summary)

Lithgow City Council v. Jackson

Case No.

S66/2011

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

11/06/2010 Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court of Appeal)(Allsop P, Basten JA and Grove J)

[2010] NSWCA 136

Catchwords

Evidence — Admissibility and relevance — Notes of ambulance officers ("Notes") — Whether Notes an opinion and inadmissible under Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) ("the Act") s 76 — Whether Notes a lay opinion and admissible under s 78 of the Act — Whether opinion of underlying matter or event includes perceptions of aftermath of matter or event — Meaning of "necessary" in s 78(b) of the Act — Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) ss 76, 78.

Short Particulars

Documents

11/02/2011 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)

24/02/2011 Notice of appeal

11/03/2011 Written submissions (Appellant)

11/03/2011 Chronology (Appellant)

20/04/2011 Written submissions (Respondent)

03/05/2011 Reply

06/05/2011 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)

28/09/2011 Judgment  (Judgment summary)

Page 273 of 278