Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission v. May
Case No.
S243/2015
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
30/06/2015 Federal Court of Australia (Allsop CJ, Kenny J, Besanko J, Robertson J, Mortimer J)
Catchwords
Workers Compensation – Injury – Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) (Act) – Where respondent enlisted in the Royal Australian Air Force in 1998 – Where respondent lodged a claim under the Act for rehabilitation and compensation in for “low immunity, fatigue, illnesses and dizziness” that respondent claimed was caused by vaccinations he received in the course of his employment in 1998 – Where no specific condition or cause of symptoms was diagnosed – Whether respondent’s symptoms amount to an “injury” as defined by the Act – Whether an ‘injury’ as defined by the Act requires a sudden or identifiable physiological change or disturbance of the normal physiological state in an employee – Whether the Act contemplates no more than a physiological change or disturbance of the normal physiological state in the employee.
Documents
13/11/2015 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
24/11/2015 Notice of appeal
18/12/2015 Written submissions (Appellant)
18/12/2015 Chronology (Appellant)
01/02/2016 Written submissions (Respondent)
15/02/2016 Reply
03/03/2016 Hearing (Full Court, Hobart)
11/05/2016 Judgment (Judgment summary)
R & Anor v. Independent Broad-Based Anti-Corruption Commissioner
Case No.
M246/2015
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
30/09/2015 Supreme Court of Victoria (Court of Appeal) (Priest, Beach & Kaye JJA)
Catchwords
Criminal law – Evidence – Confessions and admissions – Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission Act 2011 (Vic) (‘IBAC Act’) ss 115, 120, 190 - Where person ‘A’ was allegedly assaulted by appellants at a police station – Where Victorian Police notified the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commissioner (‘IBAC’) – Where IBAC commenced an investigation into appellants’ conduct and issued – summons to appellants requiring attendance at public examinations – Where appellants are under investigation by police in respect of criminal charges arising out of the same incident – Whether the power to examine persons conferred by the IBAC Act extends to persons who are the subject of a criminal investigation about the subject matter of that criminal investigation – Whether it is permissible to conduct compulsory examinations where IBAC may initiate a criminal prosecution for an offence in relation to any matter arising out of the IBAC investigation.
Documents
13/11/2015 Hearing (SLA, Canberra)
20/11/2015 Notice of appeal
11/12/2015 Written submissions (Appellants)
11/12/2015 Chronology (Appellants)
15/01/2016 Written submissions (Respondent)
22/01/2016 Reply
02/02/2016 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
10/03/2016 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Mok v. Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)
Case No.
S246/2015
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
17/04/2015 Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court of Appeal) (Meagher JA, Hoeben JA, Leeming JA)
Catchwords
Constitutional law – Commonwealth places – Service and Execution of Process Act 1992 (Cth) (‘Act’) s 89(4) – Where appellant pleaded guilty to a number of fraud offences in New South Wales – Where appellant failed to appear for sentencing – Where appellant was charged with unrelated offences in Victoria – Where appellant escaped custody whilst in an airport and was apprehended shortly after – Where appellant was charged with attempting to escape from lawful custody contrary to s 310D Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – Whether when applying a criminal offence provision by virtue of s 89(4) of the Act is the prosecution relieved of the burden of proving all elements of the offence – Whether s 89(4) of the Act is an offence creating provision.
Documents
13/11/2015 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
26/11/2015 Notice of appeal
11/12/2015 Written submissions (Appellant)
11/12/2015 Chronology (Appellant)
04/01/2016 Written submissions (Respondent)
18/01/2016 Reply
11/02/2016 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
06/04/2016 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Acquista Investments Pty Ltd & Anor v. The Urban Renewal Authority & Ors
Case No.
A29/2015
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
20/07/2015 Supreme Court of South Australia (Vanstone J, Lovell J, Debelle J)
Catchwords
Administrative law – Judicial review – Grounds of review – Delegation of power - Where first respondent entered into a deed with the Minister for State Development and third respondent to grant third respondent options to purchase 407 hectares of land owned by first respondent – Where Cabinet had made decision to enter into Deed, purportedly on behalf of first respondent - Where applicants had previously expressed interest in purchasing the property – Whether the decision of first respondent to entered into a deed granting third respondent options to purchase is amendable to judicial review – Whether a valid delegation and exercise of power under relevant legislation or executive power occurred – Whether decision to enter into deed was legally unreasonable and ultra vires in circumstances.
Documents
13/11/2015 Hearing (SLA, Canberra v/link Adelaide)
26/11/2015 Notice of appeal
18/12/2015 Written submissions (Appellants)
18/12/2015 Chronology (Appellants)
22/01/2016 Written submissions (Third Respondents)
27/01/2016 Written submissions (First and Second Respondents)
05/02/2016 Reply
04/04/2016 Notice of Discontinuance
13/04/2016 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) - VACATED
27/04/2016 Hearing (Single Justice, Melbourne v/link Adelaide)
Miller v. The Queen
Case No.
A28/2015
Related matters
A17/2015 Presley v. Director of Public Prosecutions for the State of South Australia
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
28/04/2015 Supreme Court of South Australia (Court of Criminal Appeal) (Gray J, Sulan J, Blue J)
Catchwords
Criminal law – Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) ss 11, 24(1), 269 - Murder – Intention – Where appellant was convicted with one count of murder and one count of aggravated causing of harm with two others – Where appellant was convicted on the basis of joint criminal enterprise or extended joint criminal enterprise - Where appellant was highly intoxicated – Where evidence was given that this intoxication significantly impaired appellant’s decision-making – Whether appellant was too intoxicated to form the relevant intention for a conviction of murder.
Documents
13/11/2015 Hearing (SLA, Canberra v/link Adelaide)
25/11/2015 Notice of appeal
21/12/2015 Written submissions (Appellant)
21/12/2015 Chronology (Appellant)
25/01/2016 Written submissions (Respondent)
05/02/2016 Reply
10/03/2016 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) - VACATED
15/04/2016 Supplementary written submisisons (Appellant)
29/04/2016 Supplementary written submissions (Respondent)
10/05/2016 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
11/05/2016 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
24/08/2016 Judgment (Judgment summary)