Pipikos v. Trayans

Case No.

A30/2017

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

16/12/2016 Supreme Court of South Australia (Kourakis CJ, Kelly J & Hinton J)

[2016] SASCFC 138

Catchwords

Contracts – Enforceability – Past performance – Law of Property Act 1936 (SA) s 26 – Memorandum or note of agreement – Part performance – Where appellant alleges parties entered into oral agreement that appellant would pay share of deposit on property in exchange for respondent selling interest in another property – Where trial judge held no oral agreement existed – Where Full Court held agreement existed but unenforceable – Whether Full Court erred in failing to find appellant’s payment of deposit amounted to part performance sufficient to entitle appellant to enforce agreement – Whether Full Court erred in holding handwritten note not sufficient “memorandum or note” of agreement for purposes of s 26 – Whether Full Court erred in holding appellant not entitled to enforce agreement in circumstances where respondent acknowledged agreement – Whether Full Court erred in failing to consider concessions in handwritten note to identify acts of part performance.

Short particulars

Documents

18/08/2017 Hearing (SLA, Melbourne v/link Adelaide)

31/08/2017 Notice of appeal

22/09/2017 Written submissions (Appellant)

22/09/2017 Chronology (Appellant)

23/10/2017 Written submissions (Respondent)

23/11/2017 Reply (Appellant)

14/12/2017 Reply to cross appeal (Respondent)

15/03/2018 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

15/03/2018 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)

15/03/2018 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)

12/09/2018 Judgment (Judgment summary)

Irwin v. The Queen

Case No.

B48/2017

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

3/02/2017 Supreme Court of Queensland (Court of Appeal) (M McMurdo P, Gotterson JA, Mullins J)

[2017] QCA 2

Catchwords

Criminal law – Criminal Code 1899 (Qld) s 23(1)(b) – Where appellant convicted of causing grievous bodily harm – Where appellant gave evidence of pushing complainant – Where Court of Appeal held complainant’s evidence could not rationally be accepted but dismissed appeal on basis it was open to jury to conclude ordinary person “could” reasonably have foreseen possibility of broken hip as result of push – Whether Court of Appeal erred in application of test under s 23(1)(b) by substituting “could” for “would” – Whether Court of Appeal erred in failing to find verdict unreasonable.

Short particulars

Documents

18/08/2017 Hearing (SLA, Brisbane)

30/08/2017 Notice of appeal

22/09/2017 Written submissions (Appellant)

22/09/2017 Chronology (Appellant)

13/10/2017 Written submissions (Respondent)

27/10/2017 Reply

06/12/2017 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

14/03/2018 Judgment (Judgment summary)

Rozenblit v. Vainer & Anor

Case No.

M114/2017

Case Information

Lower Court Judgment

17/03/2017 Supreme Court of Victoria (Court of Appeal) (Whelan, Kyrou and McLeish JJA)

[2017] VSCA 52

Catchwords

Procedure – Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 (Vic) r 63.03(3) – Access to courts – Impecuniosity – Where appellant made applications to file and serve amended statement of claim – Where applications refused with costs – Where appellant made further application for leave to cure drafting deficiencies – Where associate judge granted leave to file and serve amended statement of claim but ordered proceeding be stayed under r 63.03(3) until appellant paid interlocutory costs orders – Where Court of Appeal dismissed appeal – Whether in circumstances where appellant unable to meet interlocutory costs orders and no finding appellant conducted litigation in manner amounting to harassment or because of collateral purpose, Court of Appeal erred in failing to find not open to associate judge to make order under r 63.06(3) or exercise inherent jurisdiction to stay proceeding.

Short particulars

Documents

18/08/2017 Hearing (SLA, Melbourne)

28/08/2017 Notice of appeal

22/09/2017 Written submissions (Appellant)

22/09/2017 Chronology (Appellant)

13/10/2017 Written submissions (Respondent)

09/11/2017 Amended Reply

09/02/2018 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

09/02/2018 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)

09/02/2018 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)

13/06/2018 Judgment (Judgment summary)

In the matter of questions referred to the Court of Disputed Returns pursuant to section 376 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth) concerning
The Hon. Barnaby Joyce MP

Case No.

C15/2017

Related matters:

C11/2017 – Senate Reference Re Senator the Hon. Canavan

C12/2017 – Senate Reference Re Mr Ludlam

C13/2017 – Senate Reference Re Ms Waters

C14/2017 – Senate Reference Re Senator Roberts

C17/2017 – Senate Reference Re Senator the Hon. Nash

C18/2017 – Senate Reference Re Senator Xenophon

Case Information

Catchwords

Questions referred by the Senate - Court of Disputed Returns - Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth) - s376, s377 - Qualification of Senator - Constitution - s44(i)

Questions:

  1. whether, by reason of s 44(i) of the Constitution, the place of the Member for New England (Mr Joyce) has become vacant;
  2. if the answer to Question (a) is “yes”, by what means and in what manner that vacancy should be filled;
  3. what directions and other orders, if any, should the Court make in order to hear and finally dispose of this reference; and
  4. what, if any, orders should be made as to the costs of these proceedings.

Short particulars

Documents

10/08/2017 Reference from the Speaker of the House of Representatives

24/08/2017 Hearing – Determination (Single Justice, Brisbane v/link Melbourne and Sydney)

24/08/2017 Hearing – Directions (Single Justice, Brisbane v/link Melbourne and Sydney)

15/09/2017 Hearing (Single Justice, Canberra v/link Melbourne and Sydney)

26/09/2017 Written submissions (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth)

26/09/2017 Chronology

28/09/2017 Written submissions (The Hon. Mr Joyce MP)

03/10/2017 Written submissions (Mr Windsor)

06/10/2017 Reply (The Hon Mr Joyce MP)

06/10/2017 Reply (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth)

10/10/2017 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

11/10/2017 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

12/10/2017 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

27/10/2017 Judgment (Judgment Summary)

In the matter of questions referred to the Court of Disputed Returns pursuant to section 376 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth) concerning
Senator Malcolm Roberts

Case No.

C14/2017

Related matters:

C11/2017 – Senate Reference Re Senator the Hon. Canavan

C12/2017 – Senate Reference Re Mr Ludlam

C13/2017 – Senate Reference Re Ms Waters

C15/2017 – House of Representatives Reference Re: The Hon Mr Joyce MP

C17/2017 – Senate Reference Re Senator the Hon. Nash

C18/2017 – Senate Reference Re Senator Xenophon

Case Information

Catchwords

Questions referred by the Senate - Court of Disputed Returns - Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth) - s376, s377 - Qualification of Senator - Constitution - s44(i)

Questions:

  1. whether by reason of s 44(i) of the Constitution there is a vacancy in the representation of Queensland in the Senate for the place for which Senator Roberts was returned; 
  2. if the answer to Question (a) is “yes”, by what means and in what manner that vacancy should be filled;
  3. what directions and other orders, if any, should the Court make in order to hear and finally dispose of this reference; and
  4. what, if any, orders should be made as to the costs of these proceedings.

Short particulars

Documents

10/08/2017 Reference from the President of the Senate

24/08/2017 Hearing – Determination (Single Justice, Brisbane v/link Melbourne and Sydney)

24/08/2017 Hearing – Directions (Single Justice, Brisbane v/link Melbourne and Sydney

15/09/2017 Hearing (Single Justice, Canberra v/link Melbourne and Sydney)

21/09/2017 Hearing (Single Justice, Brisbane)

22/09/2017 Judgment (Single Justice)

26/09/2017 Written submissions (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth)

26/09/2017 Chronology

29/09/2017 Written submissions (Senator Roberts)

06/10/2017 Reply (Attorney-General of the Commonwealth)

10/10/2017 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

11/10/2017 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

12/10/2017 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)

27/10/2017 Judgment (Judgment Summary)

03/11/2017 Hearing (Single Justice, Canberra)

10/11/2017 Hearing (Single Justice, Canberra)

Page 150 of 278