Preliminary discovery

Hatfield v TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd [2010] NSWCA 69; 77 NSWLR 506 McColl JA at 1; Young JA at 122; Sackville AJA at 161   UCPR 5.3 relevantly provides: (1) If it appears to the court that: (a) the applicant may be entitled to make a claim for relief from the...

The meaning of words

As Lord Hoffmann explained in R v Brown, [20] in a passage cited with approval in Collector of Customs v Agfa-Gevaert Ltd: [21] “The unit of communication by means of language is the sentence and not the parts of which it is composed. The significance of individual...

"Actual knowledge"

Nightingale v Blacktown City Council [2015] NSWCA 423 Beazley P at [1]; Basten JA at [13]; Macfarlan JA at [57]; Meagher JA at [85]; Simpson JA at [86] Authority of Roman Basten JA In Roman, McColl JA stated: “[55]   It is a reasonable inference that s 45 was intended...

NSW Court of Appeal: discussion of powers

Wende v Horwath (No 2) [2015] NSWCA 416 Beazley ACJ at [1];
 Basten JA at [91];
 Adamson J at [142] 15 …as the proceedings before the Court were brought pursuant to the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 69 by way of judicial review, the Court is concerned with...

Advocate's(') immunity

Stillman v Rusbourne [2015] NSWCA 410 Basten JA: 7 There is no difficulty in articulating the test to be applied in the present case: the problem lies in its application. The immunity has a core and a penumbra. At the core is the conduct of the trial; that is, conduct...
LinkedIn Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com