IN THE SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND O.S. No. 801 of 1997 TOWNSVILLE
|
|
- Adrian Grant
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND O.S. No. 801 of 1997 TOWNSVILLE IN THE MATTER of The Trusts Act 1973 IN THE MATTER of COLLEEN PILCHOWSKI, RITA PILCHOWSKI and MERVYN JOHN PILCHOWSKI (RETIRING TRUSTEES) IN THE MATTER of RONALD EDWARD PILCHOWSKI and COLLEEN PILCHOWSKI (NEW TRUSTEES) IN THE MATTER of The Trusts Act 1973 O.S. No. 802 of 1997 IN THE MATTER of RONALD EDWARD PILCHOWSKI, MERVYN JOHN PILCHOWSKI and COLIN PILCHOWSKI (RETIRING TRUSTEES) -and- -and- -and- -and- IN THE MATTER of COLIN PILCHOWSKI and RITA PILCHOWSKI (NEW TRUSTEES) REASONS FOR JUDGMENT - CULLINANE J. DELIVERED THE TWENTY-NINTH DAY OF AUGUST, 1997 In these matters the applicants sought by a Summons in each matter a declaration that a Form 1 transfer from retiring trustees to new trustees dated the 30th April, 1997, is void and of no force and effect. In subsequent submissions it has been suggested that the Summons might be treated as a request for advice as to the validity of the transfer.
2 A brief statement of the relevant facts which are identical in each case is as follows. The applicants sought to have new trustees take the place of existing trustees and to have the new trustees registered as the proprietors of the relevant lands. The applicants did not wish the trust in either case to appear on the register. Whilst it is possible to have a trust appear on the register (See Division 6, Part 6 of the Land Titles Act 1994) it is not required that it so appear. Indeed the registration of a trust can only occur if the procedure provided for in Section 110 of the Act is followed. In seeking to have the new trustees registered as the proprietors of the lands the applicants follow what is said to be the practice of the Titles Office. In following this practice, no reference to the trust appeared in the transfer documents. In Form 24 where reference is made to the name of a trust, this was left blank. A consideration of $1-00 was shown in the Form 1. The applicants therefore sought to achieve the intended result by:- a) a transfer (showing a nominal consideration of $1.00) of the freehold title from the retiring trustees to the new trustees and subsequent registration; b) the execution of a Deed of Change of Trustees. The Commissioner of Stamp Duties has requested certain information from the solicitors for the applicants and has indicated that if requests are not complied with and information provided the Commissioner will proceed to appoint a valuer to conduct a valuation of the property. The Commissioner contends that on the face of the Form 24 and the transfer the properties are not held in trust
3 but as tenants in common in equal shares. In fact the transfers relate that the property is held as jointtenants. The Commissioner of Stamp Duties has expressed the view that the transfer is assessable to duty and has sought the above information. In a later letter he sought evidence as to the existence of the trust. He has expressed interest in the chronology of the acquisition of the land in relation to the establishment of the trust. The solicitor for the trustees sought the return of the transfer on an undertaking that it would not be acted upon. The Summons is entitled in the matter of the Trusts Act and contains an endorsement that it was not intended to serve it on any person. The officer of the Commission of the Office of State Revenue with whom the solicitor for the trustees was dealing was informed of the intention of the applicants to approach the Court and was asked to indicate whether he wished to obtain a copy of the material to be filed. Two days prior to the hearing the officer was forwarded copies of the material and there is some affidavit material which suggests that an indication was given by him through others that he did not intend to appear. Since the hearing the Court has received a letter from the Crown Law Office dated the 22nd August, 1997, to the following effect: The Commissioner has been served with application seeking a declaration that a Form 1 Transfer from the Retiring Trustees to the New Trustees dated 30 April 1997 is void and of no force and effect. The Commissioner has formed the opinion under Section 22(2)(b) of the Stamp Act that the document is charged with duty but is unable to assess the document until he is provided with further information which he has requested....
4 The Commissioner hereby informs the court that it does not intend to be represented at the hearing or make any further submission. It is clear that power to grant declaratory relief is a wide and flexible one and the authorities demonstrate the extent to its reach. In Russian Commercial and Industrial Bank -v- British Bank for Foreign Trade Ltd. (1921) 2 A.C. 438 Viscount Dunedin said at p. 448: The question must be a real and not a theoretical question; the person raising it must have a real interest to raise it; he must be able to secure a proper contradictor, that is to say, someone presently existing who has a true interest to oppose the declaration sought. That statement has received the approval of the High Court of Australia in a number of cases. See Forster -v- Jododex Aust. Pty. Ltd. (1972) 127 CLR 421 at p. 437 per Gibbs J., University of New South Wales -v- Moorehouse ( ) 122 CLR 1, and Ainsworth -v- Criminal Justice Commission ( ) 175 CLR 564 per Brennan J. at p. 596 where he said: The circumstances that call for the making of a declaration are not present if there be no real controversy to be determined. The characteristics of a controversy fit for determination by judicial declaration were stated by Viscount Dunedin in Russian Commercial and Industrial Bank -v- British Bank for Foreign Trade, Ltd: The question must be a real and not a theoretical question; the person raising it must have a real interest to raise it; he must be able to secure a proper contradictor, that is to say, some one presently existing who has a true interest to oppose the declaration sought. In Ainsworth the matter was put in this way in the joint judgment of Mason C.J., Dawson, Toohey and Gaudron JJ. at pp. 581 and 582:
5 It is now accepted that superior courts have inherent power to grant declaratory relief. It is a discretionary power which it is neither possible nor desirable to fetter... by laying down rules as to the manner of its exercise. However, it is confined by the considerations which mark out the boundaries of judicial power. Hence, declaratory relief must be directed to the determination of legal controversies and not to answering abstract or hypothetical questions. The person seeking relief must have a real interest and relief will not be granted if the question is purely hypothetical, if relief is claimed in relation to circumstances that [have] not occurred and might never happen or if the court's declaration will produce no foreseeable consequences for the parties'. Whether the Commissioner might be regarded as an appropriate contradictor was not an issue. It seems clear that, whilst the documents were sent to the Commissioner, neither the applicants nor the Commissioner regarded the latter as having any real interest in resisting the relief sought. Senior Counsel for the applicants conceded that the Court could not treat the Commissioner as a respondent. The applicant primarily contended that the authorities to which I have referred should not be regarded as laying down essential pre-conditions to declaratory relief in all cases. Reference was made to some cases in which the issue was said not to be a real issue but rather hypothetical in nature. I was also referred to cases in which it was said the parties were not really in dispute and that the requirement that there be a contradictor who has a true interest to oppose the declaration sought is not an invariable one. There are authorities which fall into a category of what might be described as friendly proceedings and in which declarations have been made. An illustration of this type of case is Thorne -v- Motor Trade Association (1937) AC 797. However in a later House of Lords judgment Sunlife Assurance of Canada -v- Jarvis (1944) AC 111 Viscount Simon at p. 113 explained the rationale for the Courts entertaining a declaration in such circumstances:
6 What is sometimes called a friendly action is not necessarily open to this objection either in the first court or an appeal for the respective parties in such an action argue for different results and the winner gains something which he would not gain if he lost. The same comment might be made about some of the authorities upon which reliance has been made such as Dinari Ltd. -v- Hancock Prospecting Pty. Ltd. (1972) 2 NSWLR 385. In none of the cases to which I have been referred has there been a declaration granted ex parte nor has there been a declaration granted in circumstances in which competing or at least differing interests were not represented though those interests may even have been represented by the same solicitor although different counsel as in Dinari Ltd -v- Hancock Prospecting Pty. Ltd. (supra). In such circumstances, as the author of Declaratory Orders 2nd Ed. P.W. Young says at p. 204:...they are both, as reasonable men, interested in the outcome of the litigation and will govern their future relationship depending on its result. The evidence does not satisfy me that there is presently an issue of a kind required for declaratory relief and it seems clear that there is not a properly interested person who can be regarded as having a true interest to oppose the declaration sought. At one time the applicants were inclined to suggest that it was sufficient to place the matter on the basis that all trustees retiring and new (for all of whom senior counsel appeared) desired to have the issue determined. I am not satisfied that this would be sufficient to justify declaratory relief. No issue as between the trustees was identified and the circumstances generally would suggest that their interests all lie in the one
7 direction. I am not persuaded that there is any basis for entertaining the proceedings on these grounds. As Hutley J.A. said in Acs -v- Anderson (1974) 1 NSWLR 212 at 215: The power given to the Court is to make binding declarations of right, that is, not right in the abstract, but right as against a particular designated legal person. The author of Declaratory Orders (supra) puts the matter in this way at para. 210: The basis of the Australian Courts system is as we have seen the same as the old English system, an adversary system. To work such a system does not involve persons having rights in vacuo but the rights of the plaintiff vis a vis the defendant. Thus, not only is it necessary to have a defendant who is a proper contradictor so that the Court will have before it persons who can put before it all the appropriate material necessary for proper consideration to be made, but also unless there is a proper defendant, any res judicata will, except perhaps in a persuasive sense, be valueless to him because there will be no proper person who will be bound as a matter of law to recognise the plaintiff's alleged right. It is conceivable that a declaration of the kind sought made in the circumstances I have described might be of value to the applicants in subsequent proceedings. However this in itself cannot in my view be a basis upon which to grant a declaration. As Moffitt P. said in McGarrigle -v- Public Service Board (1979) 1 NSWLR 292 at 295: Arguments in the Johnco Nominees case (6), and findings in the present case, relied upon the claim or view, first, that a declaration would arm the plaintiff with a weapon or argument for use in negotiations with some statutory body or government, or would provide an estoppel, in some undefined or undetermined way, in proceedings in some court or tribunal; and that it would
8 also provide an authoritative ruling concerning the exercise of power in other cases in relation to other persons not parties to the proceedings. If this be a correct assessment of reasons for decision in the instant case, or of the argument in the Johnco Nominees case (7), with respect, these considerations do not provide a legitimate basis for the making of a declaration. I recognise that the authorities establish that the nature of the issue which is sufficient to satisfy that aspect of the necessary conditions for the granting of declaratory relief will not necessarily be defeated because there is some hypothetical element to it or because the dispute may not necessarily crystallise or that the particular issue involves only a part of a wider issue. This matter was discussed in Ainsworth (supra) and see also Chief Constable of the North Wales Police -v- Evans (1982) 1 WLR For the reasons set out above I am not persuaded that it is appropriate to grant the declaratory relief sought. It was suggested that the matter however might be approached upon the basis not of a declaration but of the answer to a question posed by the applicants as trustees under the Trusts Act whether the transfer was of legal force and effect and that it should be answered no. A course something like this was followed in Dinari Ltd. -v- Hancock Prospecting Pty. Ltd. (supra). I have already indicated that the differing interests were represented although the application might be regarded as falling within the category of friendly actions in that case. However it is plain that what the applicants are seeking is in substance a declaration whether in those express terms or in the nature of an advisory judgment that the transfer is void and of no effect. In my view it is not possible to circumvent the necessary circumstances for the granting of declaratory relief by simply posing the issue as a question.
9 Section 96 of the Trusts Act (1973) provides as follows: (1) Any trustee may apply upon a written statement of facts to the court for directions concerning any property subject to a trust, or respecting the management or administration of that property, or respecting the exercise of any power or discretion vested in the trustee. (2) Every application made under this section shall be served upon, and the hearing thereof may be attended by, all persons interested in the application or such of them as the court thinks expedient. This Section has a counterpart in most of the other States. In the present case the question which arises is as to the effect of a transfer in circumstances where the Commissioner of Stamp Duties has raised certain queries about the transaction. I do not think that an issue of this kind falls within the ambit of Section 96 which permits a trustee to seek directions in respect of a matter falling within the subject matters referred to in Section 96(1) and who will be protected if he acts in accordance with it. The applicants through senior counsel made it clear that the remedy which would be most suitable to their needs would be rectification of the transfer document. However as this was explained to me this would be a futility in view of the practice of the Titles Office and would not achieve any practical benefit to the applicants. It is not necessary to consider the merits of the claim that the transfer is void and of no effect or the arguments advanced in support thereof beyond noting in passing, in relation to the claim based upon a nominal consideration not intended to be paid, the remarks of Hobhouse J. in Vantage Navigation Corporation -v- Suhail
10 and Saud Bahwan Building Materials LLC (The ALEV ) (1989) 1 Lloyd's Law Reports 138 at 147: Ultimately the question of consideration is a formality as is the use of a seal or the agreement to give a peppercorn. The result will be both summonses are dismissed.
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Re Queensland Police Credit Union Ltd [2013] QSC 273 PARTIES: FILE NO/S: BS 3893 of 2013 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: QUEENSLAND POLICE CREDIT UNION LIMITED
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: In the matter of: ACN 103 753 484 Pty Ltd (in liq) formerly Blue Chip Development Corporation Pty Ltd [2011] QSC 64 TERRY GRANT VAN DER VELDE AND DAVID MICHAEL
More informationState Reporting Bureau
[2.003] 0 SC 056 State Reporting Bureau Queensland Government Department of Justice and Attorney-General Transcript of Proceedings Copyright in this transcript is vested in the Crown. Copies thereof must
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Jackson-Knaggs v Queensland Newspapers P/L [2005] QCA 145 MARK ANDREW JACKSON-KNAGGS (applicant/respondent) v QUEENSLAND BUILDING SERVICES AUTHORITY (first
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Tropac Timbers P/L v A-One Asphalt P/L [2005] QSC 378 PARTIES: TROPAC TIMBERS PTY LTD ACN 108 304 990 (plaintiff/respondent v A-ONE ASPHALT PTY LTD ACN 059 162 186
More informationAPPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA [CIW REGISTRY No. BETWEEN: [Plaintiffs full name] Plaintiff and [Defendant's full name] Defendant APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 20 To: The Defendant [defendant's
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE COMMERCIAL COURT TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION LIST
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE COMMERCIAL COURT TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION LIST Not Restricted S ECI 2014 000686 AMASYA ENTERPRISES PTY LTD & ANOR (in accordance with the schedule)
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Maclag (No 11) P/L & Anor v Chantay Too P/L (No 2) [2009] QSC 299 PARTIES: MACLAG (NO 11) PTY LTD ACN 010 611 631 AS TRUSTEE FOR THE BURNS FAMILY TRUST (first plaintiff)
More informationCONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AFFECTING PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS
302 UNSW Law Journal Volume 29(3) CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AFFECTING PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS A R BLACKSHIELD The reason why parliaments cannot bind their successors, said Dicey (quoting Alpheus Todd),
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: FILE NO: DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: DELIVERED ON: DELIVERED AT: HEARING DATE: JUDGE: ORDER: CATCHWORDS: Old Newspapers P/L v Acting Magistrate
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Nadao Stott v Lyons and Stott (as executors) [2007] QSC 087 PARTIES: NADAO STOTT (under Part IV, sections 40-44, Succession Act 1981) (applicant) AND FILE NO/S: BS
More informationTHE HIGH COURT JUDICIAL REVIEW A. A. A. A. D. AND REFUGEE APPEALS TRIBUNAL AND THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE, EQUALITY AND LAW REFORM
Neutral Citation Number: [2009] IEHC 326 THE HIGH COURT JUDICIAL REVIEW 2007 1728 JR BETWEEN A. A. A. A. D. AND APPLICANT REFUGEE APPEALS TRIBUNAL AND THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE, EQUALITY AND LAW REFORM
More informationCITATION: Firedam Civil Engineering Pty Ltd v Shoalhaven City Council [2009] NSWSC 802
NEW SOUTH WALES SUPREME COURT CITATION: Firedam Civil Engineering Pty Ltd v Shoalhaven City Council [2009] NSWSC 802 JURISDICTION: Equity FILE NUMBER(S): 55037/2009 HEARING DATE(S): 24 July 2009 JUDGMENT
More informationAUSTRALIAN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW NEWS
AUSTRALIAN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW NEWS NEW SOUTH WALES SENTENCING PRINCIPLES OF TOTALITY" AND "EVENHANDEDNESS" CamillerVs Stock Feeds Pty Ltd v Environment Protection Authority Unreported, Court of Criminal
More informationPASTORAL AND GRAZING LEASES AND NATIVE TITLE
PASTORAL AND GRAZING LEASES AND NATIVE TITLE Graham Hiley QC The background jurisprudence in Mabo No 2, Wik and the Native Title Amendment Act 1998 concerning the extinguishment of native title on leases,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Kinsella v Gold Coast City Council [2014] QSC 65 PARTIES: FILE NO/S: BS 5010 of 2013 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: HELEN BARBARA and PETER LOUIS KINSELLA
More informationTWO NOTES ON RECENT DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING 'PROXIMITY' IN NEGLIGENCE ACTIONS PROXIMITY AND NEGLIGENT ADVICE THE SAN SEBASTIAN CASE
TWO NOTES ON RECENT DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING 'PROXIMITY' IN NEGLIGENCE ACTIONS PROXIMITY AND NEGLIGENT ADVICE THE SAN SEBASTIAN CASE Alex Bruce* 1. Introduction In November 1986, the High Court handed down
More informationHIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL AIRLINES COMMISSION v. THE COMMONWEALTH [1975] HCA 33; (1975) 132 CLR 582 High Court High Court of Australia Mason J.(1) CATCHWORDS High Court - Practice - Action
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SUB-REGISTRY- SAN FERNANDO AND
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SUB-REGISTRY- SAN FERNANDO Claim No: CV2016-01485 VIJAY SINGH Applicant/Intended Claimant AND THE OMBUDSMAN Respondent/Intended Defendant
More informationFEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Global Green Plan Ltd [2010] FCA 1057 Citation: Parties: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Global Green Plan Ltd
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Tynan & Anor v Filmana Pty Ltd & Ors (No 2) [2015] QSC 367 PARTIES: DAVID PATRICK TYNAN and JUDITH GARCIA TYNAN (plaintiffs) v FILMANA PTY LTD ACN 080 055 429 (first
More informationMobil Oil Australia Pty Limited Plaintiff; and The State of Victoria and Another Defendants. 211 CLR 1, [2002] HCA 27) [2002] HCA 27
Constitutional Law - State Parliament - Powers - Legislative scheme for representative actions - Whether beyond territorial competence of State Parliament - Whether invalid conferral of nonjudicial power
More information1.1 Which categories of administrative decisions are eligible for review (administrative regulations/individual decisions)?
1. Jurisdiction or competence 1.1 Which categories of administrative decisions are eligible for review (administrative regulations/individual decisions)? The High Court has power of judicial review over
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: FILE NO/S: No 3696 of 2018 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Midson Construction (Qld) Pty Ltd & Ors v Queensland Building and Construction Commission
More informationSome ethical questions when opposing parties are. unrepresented or upon ceasing to act as a solicitor
Some ethical questions when opposing parties are unrepresented or upon ceasing to act as a solicitor Monash Guest Lecture in Ethics 9 March 2011 G.T. Pagone * I thought I might talk to you today about
More informationAbbott Australasia Pty Ltd>> v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Ors [1998] FCA 1770 (31 July 1998)
Abbott Australasia Pty Ltd>> v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Ors [1998] FCA 1770 (31 July 1998) Last Updated: 1 June 1999 FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA HUMAN RIGHTS - SEX DISCRIMINATION -
More informationCATCHWORDS: BANKRUPTCY - application to Court to act in aid of a United Kingdom bankruptcy - power to act - relevant principles
FEDERAL COURT UNREPORTED JUDGMENTS DICK (as trustee of the property of McINTOSH) v McINTOSH (A bankrupt) Dick as Trustee in Bankruptcy v McIntosh [2001] FCA 1008 Q 7305 of 2001 FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
More informationJUDGMENT. Honourable Attorney General and another (Appellants) v Isaac (Respondent) (Antigua and Barbuda)
Easter Term [2018] UKPC 11 Privy Council Appeal No 0077 of 2016 JUDGMENT Honourable Attorney General and another (Appellants) v Isaac (Respondent) (Antigua and Barbuda) From the Court of Appeal of the
More informationPage numbers have not been included, however they could be added when the final document is agreed.
Notes from PAVS The following Document is the Model Declaration of Trust for a Charitable Trust provided by the Charity Commission for England and Wales (GD2) April 1998 edition. We have reproduced the
More informationJ.Q.A.T. PTY LIMITED STORM CONNOLLY J.:
162 1987 J.Q.A.T. PTY LIMITED v. STORM (O.S. 749/1985) Full Court (Connolly J., Williams J., Ambrose J.) 19, 23 June; 4 July 1986 Trade Residual Matters Restraint of trade by agreement Validity Restrictive
More informationAPPEALS FROM VCAT TO THE SUPREME COURT
APPEALS FROM VCAT TO THE SUPREME COURT Author: Graeme Peake Date: 15 August, 2018 Copyright 2018 This work is copyright. Apart from any permitted use under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced
More informationAnother Strahan case loss of legal professional privilege
EVIDENCE Another Strahan case loss of legal professional privilege JACKY CAMPBELL,JANUARY 2014 CCH LAW CHAT Jacky Campbell Forte Family Lawyers CCH Law Chat January 2014 Another Strahan case - Loss of
More informationLetters of Request in Cross-border Insolvencies and the UNCITRAL model law recent cases and developments
Letters of Request in Cross-border Insolvencies and the UNCITRAL model law recent cases and developments Michael Quinlan, Partner, Allens Arthur Robinson Angela Martin, Overseas Practitioner, Allens Arthur
More informationTopic Pleading and Joinder of claims and parties, Representative and Class Actions 1) Res Judicata (Colbran )
WEEK 3 Topic Pleading and Joinder of claims and parties, Representative and Class Actions 1) Res Judicata (Colbran 363-370) Res judicata is a type of plea made in court that precludes the relitgation of
More informationWhich country? The clearly inappropriate forum test in Australian family law
INTERNATIONAL FAMILY LAW DISPUTES Which country? The clearly inappropriate forum test in Australian family law JACKY CAMPBELL, DECEMBER 2015 Which country? The "clearly inappropriate forum" test in Australian
More informationState Reporting Bureau
^2.004) State Reporting Bureau Queensland Government Department of justice and Attorney-General Transcript of Proceedings Copyright in this transcript is vested in the Crown. Copies thereof must not be
More informationINDUSTRIAL INJURIES BENEFIT. Arising out of and in the course of insurable employment-home helpjoumey
R(1) 12/75 Tribunal Decist on 12.8.75 INDUSTRIAL INJURIES BENEFIT Arising out of and in the course of insurable employment-home helpjoumey to duty point. The claimant, a home help employed by a county
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: The Public Trustee of Queensland as a Corporation Sole [2012] QSC 178 RE: THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF QUEENSLAND AS A CORPORATION SOLE (applicant) FILE NO/S: 4065
More informationState Reporting Bureau
Qsc 34^ State Reporting Bureau Queensland Government Department of justice and Attorney-General Transcript of Proceedings >pyright in this transcript is vested in the Crown. Copies thereof must not be
More informationHORTA v THE COMMONWEALTH*
HORTA v THE COMMONWEALTH* In a unanimous judgment most notable for its brevity (eight pages) and its speed (eight days), the High Court in Horta v The Commonwealth upheld the validity of Commonwealth legislation
More informationState Reporting Bureau
State Reporting Bureau \ac03js sc Queensl Government Department of Justice Attorney-General Transcript of Proceedings Copyright in this transcript is vested in the Crown. Copies thereof must not be made
More informationWeek 2(a) Trade and Commerce
Week 2(a) Trade and Commerce Section 51(i) Commonwealth Constitution: The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Port Ballidu Pty Ltd v Mullins Lawyers [2017] QSC 91 PARTIES: PORT BALLIDU PTY LTD ACN 010 820 185 (plaintiff) v MULLINS LAWYERS (third defendant) FILE NO/S: No 7459
More informationFEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Caratti v Commissioner of Taxation [2016] FCA 754 File number: NSD 792 of 2016 Judge: ROBERTSON J Date of judgment: 29 June 2016 Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE application
More informationIntroduction 2. Common Law 2. Common Law versus Legislation 5. How to Find and Understand Law 6. Legal Resources 8.
Changing Your Name CHAPTER CONTENTS Introduction 2 Common Law 2 Common Law versus Legislation 5 How to Find and Understand Law 6 Legal Resources 8 Legal Notices 10 2016 Caxton Legal Centre Inc. queenslandlawhandbook.org.au
More informationWaiver, Estoppel and Election in the context of adjudication applications
1 Waiver, Estoppel and Election in the context of adjudication applications Adjudication Forum 13 November 2012 Max Tonkin The Pareto Principal Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto observed in 1906 that 80%
More informationVersion 2 of 2. Trustee Act c. 29
Pagina 1 di 40 General Advice. Persons Terms Effect Sole Remuneration Application. Personal Authorised Common Interpretation. Minor Power Commencement trustees. of and to who power agency. may appointment
More informationSupreme Court New South Wales
Supreme Court New South Wales Case Name: Munsie v Dowling (No. 7) Medium Neutral Citation: Munsie v Dowling (No. 7) [2015] NSWSC 1832 Hearing Date(s): 30 November 2015 Date of Orders: 4 December 2015 Date
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between. And
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV No. 2011-00818 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between SURESH PATEL Claimant And THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE Defendant Dated 25 th June, 2013 Before the Honourable Mr.
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Spain v Commonwealth of Australia [2015] QSC 258 PARTIES: ERIC RAYMOND SPAIN (plaintiff) v COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (defendant) FILE NO: 2923 of 2015 DIVISION: PROCEEDING:
More informationFor personal use only
Driver Australia Master Trust VWFS Australia Security Deed Dated 23 June 2016 Volkswagen Financial Services Australia Pty Limited (ABN 20 097 071 460 ( VWFS Australia Perpetual Corporate Trust Limited
More information' R v Rogers [No 21 (1992) 29 NSWLR 179, ROGERS v THE QUEEN*
ROGERS v THE QUEEN* ISSUE ESTOPPEL AND ABUSE OF PROCESS IN CRIMINALAW The High Court's decision in Rogers appears to resolve uncertainty as to whether the principle of issue estoppel is applicable to criminal
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: State of Queensland v O Keefe [2016] QCA 135 PARTIES: STATE OF QUEENSLAND (applicant/appellant) v CHRISTOPHER LAURENCE O KEEFE (respondent) FILE NO/S: Appeal No 9321
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Mowen v Rockhampton Regional Council [2018] QSC 44 PARTIES: FILE NO/S: S449/17 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: BEVAN ALAN MOWEN (Plaintiff) v ROCKHAMPTON
More information"DULY SEALED" DOCUMENTS AND KNOWLEDGE OF DIRECTORS' BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
JULY 19931 "DULY SEALED" DOCUMENTS AND KNOWLEDGE OF DIRECTORS' BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY R CARROLL* Section 164 of the Corporations Law, introduced in 1983,' was intended to codify and clarify certain aspects
More informationREGALPOINT RESOURCES LIMITED A.C.N Circular to Shareholders. Including NOTICE OF MEETING EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM PROXY FORM
REGALPOINT RESOURCES LIMITED A.C.N. 122 727 342 Circular to Shareholders Including NOTICE OF MEETING EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM PROXY FORM Date of Meeting 6 November 2012 Time of Meeting 10am Place of Meeting
More informationBrodyn P/L t/as Time Cost and Quality v Davenport [2004] Adj.L.R. 11/03
Brodyn Pty. Ltd. t/as Time Cost and Quality v. Philip Davenport (1) Dasein Constructions P/L (2) Judgment : New South Wales Court of Appeal before Mason P ; Giles JA ; Hodgson JA : 3 rd November 2004.
More information--- WHELAN J --- ACD Tridon Inc v Tridon Australia Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 896, distinguished. --- Mr A P Trichardt
!Undefined Bookmark, I IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE COMMERCIAL AND EQUITY DIVISION Do Not Send for Reporting Not Restricted No. 5774 of 2005 LA DONNA PTY LTD Plaintiff v WOLFORD AG Defendant
More informationGuidance Statement No. 7 Limited scope representation in dispute resolution (Published 8 June 2017)
Fidelity Service Courage Guidance Statement No. 7 Limited scope representation in dispute resolution (Published 8 June 2017) 1. Introduction 1.1. Who should read this Guidance Statement? This Guidance
More informationCompany law and securities
Editor: Professor Robert Baxt AO JUDICIAL RECOGNITION OF INDIRECT CAUSATION AND SHAREHOLDER CLASS ACTIONS BY MICHAEL LEGG AND MADELEINE HARKIN Introduction In shareholder class actions alleging misleading
More informationSECTION 272 OF THE PROPERTY LAW ACT 1958 ("PLA") - ITS EFFECT ON TITLE DISCREPANCIES INCLUDING ADVERSE POSSESSION CLAIMS
SECTION 272 OF THE PROPERTY LAW ACT 1958 ("PLA") - ITS EFFECT ON TITLE DISCREPANCIES INCLUDING ADVERSE POSSESSION CLAIMS Prepared by Chantel Harkin & presented by Geoff Manolitsa Macpherson & Kelley Lawyers
More informationThe House of Lords looked at the perception of bias and whether such presence breached a defendant's right to fair trial.
The House of Lords in the case of Regina v Abdroikov, Green and Williamson, [2007] UKHL 37 [2007] 1 W.L.R. 2679, decided on 17 October 2007, examined the issue of jury composition, specifically considering
More informationFEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Central Queensland Services Pty Ltd v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2017] FCAFC 43 Review of: Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Central Queensland
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Cousins v Mt Isa Mines Ltd [2006] QCA 261 PARTIES: TRENT JEFFERY COUSINS (applicant/appellant) v MT ISA MINES LIMITED ACN 009 661 447 (respondent/respondent) FILE
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: FILE NO: 6923 of 2003 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Holland & Anor. v. Queensland Law Society Incorporated & Anor. [2003] QSC 327 GREGORY IAN HOLLAND
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Ireland v Trilby Misso Lawyers [2011] QSC 127 PARTIES: COLIN LEO IRELAND Applicant V TRILBY MISSO LAWYERS Respondent FILE NO/S: SC 24 of 2011 DIVISION: PROCEEDING:
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: FILE NO: 12888 of 2008 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Taylor v Queensland Law Society Incorporated [2011] QSC 8 SYLVIA PAMELA TAYLOR (appellant)
More informationA Law Librarian's Guide Through the Mabo Maze
A Law Librarian's Guide Through the Mabo Maze Anne Twomey Parliamentary Research Service Parliamentary Library, Canberra Introduction This article is a guide through the material which relates to the Mabo
More informationELIZABETH BAY DEVELOPMENTS PTY LTD V BORAL BUILDING SERVICES PTY LTD
Page 1 1 of 1 DOCUMENT: New South Wales Law Reports/36 NSWLR/ELIZABETH BAY DEVELOPMENTS PTY LTD V BORAL BUILDING SERVICES PTY LTD - (1995) 36 NSWLR 709-28 March 1995 ELIZABETH BAY DEVELOPMENTS PTY LTD
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Manthey Redmond (Aust) Pty Ltd (in liq) & Ors v Manthey & Ors [2017] QSC 145 PARTIES: MANTHEY REDMOND (AUST) PTY LTD (ACN 130 202 845) (IN LIQ) FILE NO/S: DIVISION:
More informationCHOICE OF LAW (GOVERNING LAW) BOILERPLATE CLAUSE
CHOICE OF LAW (GOVERNING LAW) BOILERPLATE CLAUSE Need to know A choice of law clause (or governing law clause) enables contracting parties to nominate the law which applies to govern their contract. The
More informationHIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA GAGELER J PLAINTIFF S3/2013 PLAINTIFF AND MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP & ANOR DEFENDANTS Plaintiff S3/2013 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2013] HCA 22 26
More informationJUDGMENT. Rolle Family and Company Limited (Appellant) v Rolle (Respondent) (Bahamas)
Michaelmas Term [2017] UKPC 35 Privy Council Appeal No 0095 of 2015 JUDGMENT Rolle Family and Company Limited (Appellant) v Rolle (Respondent) (Bahamas) From the Court of Appeal of the Commonwealth of
More informationConducting an Administrative Law Case in New South Wales and the New Rule 59 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
Conducting an Administrative Law Case in New South Wales and the New Rule 59 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) a paper delivered by Mark Robinson SC to the NSW Bar Association s seminar organised
More informationJUDGMENT. Attorney General (Appellant) v Dumas (Respondent) (Trinidad and Tobago)
Hilary Term [2017] UKPC 12 Privy Council Appeal No 0069 of 2015 JUDGMENT Attorney General (Appellant) v Dumas (Respondent) (Trinidad and Tobago) From the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Trinidad and
More informationNew South Wales Court of Appeal
BCS Strata Management Pty. Limited t/as Body Corporate Services v. Robinson & Anor.... Page 1 of 10 New South Wales Court of Appeal [Index] [Search] [Download] [Help] BCS Strata Management Pty. Limited
More informationJudicial Review. The issue is whether the decision was made under Commonwealth or State law and which court has jurisdiction.
Judicial Review Jurisdiction The issue is whether the decision was made under Commonwealth or State law and which court has jurisdiction. Federal decisions must go to the Federal courts and State (and
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: FILE NO/S: No 5582 of 2013 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Australian Society of Ophthalmologists & Anor v Optometry Board of Australia [2013] QSC
More informationUPDATE INSURANCE HUNT & HUNT LAWYERS V MITCHELL MORGAN NOMINEES PTY LTD & ORS APRIL 2013 VELLA OVERTURNED BY HIGH COURT
APRIL 2013 INSURANCE UPDATE VELLA OVERTURNED BY HIGH COURT HUNT & HUNT LAWYERS V MITCHELL MORGAN NOMINEES PTY LTD & ORS SNAPSHOT On 3 April 2013, the High Court of Australia handed down its decision in
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Cornwall [2005] QCA 345 PARTIES: R v CORNWALL, Jason Colin (applicant/appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 156 of 2005 DC No 147 of 2005 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING
More informationGriffith University v Tang: Review of University Decisions Made Under an Enactment
Griffith University v Tang: Review of University Decisions Made Under an Enactment MELISSA GANGEMI* 1. Introduction In Griffith University v Tang, 1 the court was presented with the quandary of determining
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO BETWEEN. CURTIS LACKHANSINGH Claimant AND
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV 2007-00687 BETWEEN CURTIS LACKHANSINGH Claimant AND P. C. HAREWOOD No. 3831 AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendants Before
More information8. Foreign judgments which can be registered not to be enforceable otherwise
Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act (Cap 76) CHAPTER 76 THE FOREIGN JUDGMENTS (RECIPROCAL ENFORCEMENT) ACT CHAPTER 76 THE FOREIGN JUDGMENTS (RECIPROCAL ENFORCEMENT) ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: FILE NO: S5736 of 2002 DIVISION: PROCEEDINGS: ORIGINATING COURT: Atlantic 3-Financial (Aust) Pty Ltd v. Deskhurst Pty Ltd & Anor [2004] QSC 130 ATLANTIC 3-FINANCIAL
More informationAmici Curiae and Access to Constitutional Justice in the High Court of Australia
Bond Law Review Volume 22 Issue 3 Article 10 2010 Amici Curiae and Access to Constitutional Justice in the High Court of Australia Ernst Willheim Follow this and additional works at: http://epublications.bond.edu.au/blr
More informationIn Re the A Irrevocable Trust [1999] CKHC 6; 2 ITELR 482 (11 August 1999)
In Re the A Irrevocable Trust [1999] CKHC 6; 2 ITELR 482 (11 August 1999) HIGH COURT OF THE COOK ISLANDS RAROTONGA (CIVIL DIVISION) Re the A Irrevocable Trust QUILLIAM CJ HEARING DATE: 29 JULY 1999. JUDGMENT
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE AD 2014 CIVIL APPEAL NO 4 OF 2011 THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BELIZE
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE AD 2014 CIVIL APPEAL NO 4 OF 2011 THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BELIZE Appellant v BCB HOLDINGS LIMITED and THE BELIZE BANK LIMITED Respondents BEFORE The Hon Mr Justice Dennis
More informationState Reporting Bureau
Jaco3} ^sc37 State Reporting Bureau Queensland Government Department of Justice and Attorney-General Transcript of Proceedings Copyright in this transcript is vested in the Crown. Copies thereof must not
More informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE SUPREME COURT ACCRA, GHANA AD 2016
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE SUPREME COURT ACCRA, GHANA AD 2016 CORAM: WOOD (MRS), CJ (PRESIDING) ANSAH, JSC ADINYIRA (MRS), JSC DOTSE, JSC ANIN YEBOAH, JSC BAFFOE - BONNIE, JSC GBADEGBE,
More informationLAWS1052 COURSE NOTES
LAWS1052 COURSE NOTES INTRODUCTION TO LAW AND JUSTICE LAWS1052: Introduction to & Justice Course Notes... 1 Chapter 1: THE DISTINCTIVENESS OF AUSTRALIAN LAW... 1 Chapter 15: INTERPRETING STATUTES... 3
More informationLocal Planning Appeal Tribunal Tribunal d appel de l aménagement local
Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Tribunal d appel de l aménagement local ISSUE DATE: August 27, 2018 CASE NO(S).: MM160054 The Ontario Municipal Board (the OMB ) is continued under the name Local Planning
More informationSupreme Court New South Wales
Page 1 of 14 Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation Australian Vaccination Network Inc v Health Care Complaints Commission [2012] NSWSC 110 Hearing Dates 22 February 2012 Decision Date 24/02/2012
More informationState Reporting Bureau
State Reporting Bureau Transcript of Proceedings Copyright in this transcript is vested in the Crown. Copies thereof must not be made or sold without the written authority of the Director, State Reporting
More informationFEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA APC Logistics Pty Ltd v CJ Nutracon Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 136 AGREEMENT TO ARBITRATE whether or not agreement to arbitrate reached between parties by the exchange of e-mails whether
More informationHIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA FRENCH C, HAYNE, CRENNAN, KIEFEL, BELL AND GAGELER ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MICHAEL AMES CONDON APPLICANT AND POMPANO PTY LTD & ANOR RESPONDENTS Assistant Commissioner Michael ames
More informationr 28. CASE NOTES Mabo v State of Queensland (1992) 66ALJR408 FEDERAL Native Title Recognized By High Court Linda Pearson Macquarie University Sydney
r 28. CASE NOTES FEDERAL Native Title Recognized By High Court Mabo v State of Queensland (1992) 66ALJR408 The recognition of native title by the full Court of the High Court of Australia in Mabo v Queensland
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Martinek Holdings Pty Ltd v Reed Construction (Qld) Pty Ltd [2009] QCA 329 PARTIES: MARTINEK HOLDINGS PTY LTD ACN 106 533 242 (applicant/appellant) v REED CONSTRUCTION
More informationCriminal Organisation Control Legislation and Cases
Criminal Organisation Control Legislation and Cases 2008-2013 Contents Background...2 Suggested Reading...2 Legislation and Case law By Year...3 Legislation and Case Law By State...4 Amendments to Crime
More informationSUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 20
Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth (2003) 195 ALR 24 The text on pages 893-94 sets out s 474 of the Migration Act, as amended in 2001 in the wake of the Tampa controversy (see Chapter 12); and also refers
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ST. CHRISTOPHER AND NEVIS THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PRISONS
SAINT CHRISTOPHER AND NEWS 1 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1 OF 1997 BETWEEN: IN THE COURT OF APPEAL THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ST. CHRISTOPHER AND NEVIS THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PRISONS
More information