Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: Plaintiff M64/2015 v. Minister for Immigration and Border Protection
Date: 06 November 2015
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 2h 36m
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: Fernando by his Tutor Ley v. Commonwealth of Australia & Anor
Date: 05 November 2015
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 43m
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: Fair Work Ombudsman v. Quest South Perth Holdings Pty Ltd & Ors
Date: 04 November 2015
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 2h 02m
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.
Robinson Helicopter Company Incorporated v. McDermott & Ors
Case No.
B61/2015
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
19/12/2014 Supreme Court of Queensland (Court of Appeal) (M McMurdo P, Holmes JA, A Wilson J)
Catchwords
Torts – Negligence – Where first respondent was a passenger in a Robinson R 22 helicopter which was manufactured by the appellant– Where helicopter crashed, killing the pilot and seriously injuring first respondent – Where it was a failure in the forward flexplate of the helicopter which caused it to crash – Whether appellant is liable for the failures of the helicopter – Whether a manufacturer of goods is to be held liable under ss 75AD and AE of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) or in negligence by reason of the maintenance manual calling for a technician to verify the parts without specifying the particular method to do so – Whether appellant should have been held liable without consideration of whether the negligence or breach of the Trade Practices Act was causative of any loss
Documents
16/10/2015 Hearing (SLA, Brisbane)
30/10/2015 Notice of appeal
27/11/2015 Written submissions (Appellant)
27/11/2015 Chronology (Appellant)
18/12/2015 Written submissions (Respondents)
15/01/2015 Reply
12/04/2016 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
08/06/2016 Judgment (Judgment summary)
IMM v. The Queen
Case No.
D12/2015
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
19/12/2014 Supreme Court of the Northern Territory (Court of Criminal Appeal) (Riley CJ, Kelly J, Hiley J)
Catchwords
Criminal law – Evidence – Tendency evidence – Evidence (National Uniform Legislation) Act (NT) s 97 – Where applicant was found guilty of three of four offences committed against his step grandchild – Where Complainant made a complaint to family members – Where evidence was given of an incident which was not charged and occurred after the time period of the offences charged – Where several people give evidence of the complaints – Whether trial judge is required to assume that the jury will accept the evidence where considering the probative value of the tendency evidence pursuant to s 97(1)(b) of the Uniform Evidence Law – Whether hearsay evidence of a complaint, involving general allegations of sexual misconduct not linked to any particular charge is admissible as evidence of guilt of the offences charged under the Uniform Evidence Law – Whether the correct approach to assessment of “probative value” for the purposes of s 137 of the Uniform Evidence Law.
Documents
16/10/2015 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
30/10/2015 Notice of appeal
20/11/2015 Written submissions- redacted (Appellant)
20/11/2015 Chronology - redacted (Appellant)
11/12/2015 Written submissions - redacted (Respondent)
15/01/2016 Reply
03/02/2016 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
14/04/2016 Judgment (Judgment summary)