Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: Awad v. the Queen; Tambakakis v. The Queen
Date: 13 September 2022
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 3h 37m
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: ELECTRICITY NETWORKS CORPORATION TRADING AS WESTERN POWER V HERRIDGE PARTIES & ORS
Date: 08 September 2022
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 1h 07m
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: ELECTRICITY NETWORKS CORPORATION TRADING AS WESTERN POWER HERRIDGE PARTIES & ORS V Herridge Parties & Ors
Date: 07 September 2022
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 4h 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.
Unions NSW & Ors v. State of New South Wales
Case No.
Case no S98/2022
Case Information
Catchwords
Constitutional law – Implied freedom of communication on governmental and political matters – Elections – Electoral funding – Where s 29(11) of Electoral Funding Act 2018 (NSW) ("EF Act") provides cap of $20,000 on electoral expenditure by third-party campaigner for State by-election – Where, pursuant to s 33(1) of EF Act, unlawful for third-party campaigner to incur electoral expenditure for State election campaign during capped State expenditure period for election if exceeds cap on electoral expenditure – Where, pursuant to s 35(1) of EF Act, unlawful for third-party to act in concert with another person or persons to incur electoral expenditure in relation to election campaign during capped expenditure period for election that exceeds cap for third-party campaigner for election – Where plaintiffs assert intention to register as "third-party campaigner", to incur "electoral expenditure", and to coordinate electoral campaigns with other entities – Where plaintiffs assert to be detrimentally affected by EF Act insofar as EF Act regulates those activities – Whether s 29(11) read with s 33(1) and/or s 35 invalid because impermissibly burdens implied freedom of political communication.
Documents*
29/06/2022 Writ of summons
29/06/2022 Notice of Constitutional Matter (Plaintiffs)
26/08/2022 Hearing (Single Justice, Canberra by video connection)
28/09/2022 Hearing (Single Justice, Canberra by video connection)
28/09/2022 Order referring matter to the Full Court
07/10/2022 Written submissions (Plaintiffs)
07/10/2022 Chronology (Plaintiffs)
26/10/2022 Written submissions (Defendant)
02/11/2022 Written submissions (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth Intervening)
04/11/2022 Order programming amended pleadings and supplementary submissions
04/11/2022 Notice of Constitutional Matter (Plaintiffs)
08/11/2022 Reply
10/11/2022 Supplementary submissions (Defendant)
11/11/2022 Supplementary submissions (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth intervening)
16/11/2022 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
16/11/2022 Outline of oral argument (Plaintiffs)
16/11/2022 Outline of oral argument (Defendant)
16/11/2022 Outline of oral argument (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth intervening)
17/11/2022 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
15/02/2023 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Bromley v. The King
Case No.
A40/2021
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
29/05/2018 Supreme Court of South Australia (Peek, Stanley and Nicholson JJ)
Catchwords
Criminal law – Second or subsequent appeal – Further evidence – Where applicant and co-accused convicted of murder – Where, at trial, prosecution led evidence from eyewitness who suffered from schizoaffective disorder – Where applicant and co-accused appealed against convictions, including on ground that eyewitness's evidence unsafe, but appeals dismissed and subsequent petitions for mercy refused – Where applicant sought to appeal pursuant to s 353A of Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) – Where s 353A empowers Full Court to hear second or subsequent appeal against conviction by person convicted on information if Court satisfied there "fresh and compelling evidence" that should, in "interests of justice", be considered on appeal – Where applicant adduced expert evidence concerning reliability of eyewitness in light of mental illness – Where Court of Appeal refused application, holding new evidence not "fresh" or "compelling", and not in "interests of justice" to consider new evidence – Whether new evidence "compelling" – Whether in "interests of justice" to consider applicant's evidence.
Documents*
24/11/2021 Application for special leave to appeal
16/09/2022 Hearing (SLA, Canberra by video connection)
11/11/2022 Written submissions (Applicant)
11/11/2022 Chronology (Applicant)
09/12/2022 Written submissions (Respondent)
23/12/2022 Reply
12/05/2023 Amended written submissions (Applicant)
17/05/2023 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)
17/05/2023 Outline of oral argument (Applicant)
16/05/2023 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)
18/05/2023 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)
13/12/2023 Judgment (Judgment summary)