Tag Archives: Sydney Solicitors

Queensland Nickel Pty Limited v Commonwealth of Australia [2015] HCA 12

ON 8 APRIL 2015, the High Court of Australia delivered Queensland Nickel Pty Limited v Commonwealth of Australia [2015] HCA 12 (8 April 2015).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2015/12.html

The High Court held that certain provisions under the Clean Energy Regulations 2011 (Cth) were valid as they did not give preference to one State over other States and therefore did not contravene s99 of the Constitution.

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

CMB v Attorney General for New South Wales [2015] HCA 9 (11 March 2015)

ON 11 MARCH 2015 the High Court of Australia delivered CMB v Attorney General for New South Wales [2015] HCA 9 (11 March 2015).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2015/9.html

The High Court allowed an appeal against a decision of the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal to impose a custodial sentence, remitting the matter to the CCA for re-determination.

Lawyers

1300 00 2088

CMB v Attorney General for New South Wales [2015] HCA 9 (11 March 2015)

ON 11 MARCH 2015 the High Court of Australia delivered CMB v Attorney General for New South Wales [2015] HCA 9 (11 March 2015).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2015/9.html

The High Court allowed an appeal against a decision of the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal to impose a custodial sentence, remitting the matter to the CCA for re-determination.

Lawyers

1300 00 2088

Grant Samuel Corporate Finance Pty Limited v Fletcher: JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association v Fletcher [2015] HCA 8

ON 11 MARCH 2015, the High Court of Australia delivered Grant Samuel Corporate Finance Pty Limited v Fletcher: JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association v Fletcher [2015] HCA 8 (11 March 2015).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2015/8.html

The High Court held that rule 36.16(2)(b) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) could not be utilised to vary the time for the bringing of proceedings for orders with respect to voidable transactions under s588FF(3) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).

Lawyers

1300 00 2088

Fortress Credit Corporation (Australia) II Pty Limited v Fletcher [2015] HCA 10

ON 11 MARCH 2015 the High Court of Australia delivered Fortress Credit Corporation (Australia) II Pty Limited v Fletcher [2015] HCA 10 (11 March 2015).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2015/10.html

Lawyers

1300 00 2088

Australian Communications and Media Authority v Today FM (Sydney) Pty Ltd [2015] HCA 7

ON 4 MARCH 2015, the High Court of Australia delivered Australian Communications and Media Authority v Today FM (Sydney) Pty Ltd [2015] HCA 7 (4 March 2015).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2015/7.html

The High Court allowed an appeal by the Australian Communications Media Authority (ACMA) against a decision of the Federal Court of Australia regarding the investigation of a broadcast in December 2012 by Today FM (Sydney) Pty Ltd, a licensee under the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (Cth).

The broadcast contained a recorded telephone conversation between two radio presenters and two of the staff of the King Edward VII Hospital in London, where the Duchess of Cambridge was an inpatient. The conversation was recorded and broadcast without the consent of either of the hospital staff.

ACMA investigated the matter and determined that Today FM breached a licence condition of breaching a law of the Commonwealth or State or Territory by communicating a private conversation without the consent of the principal parties in breach of the Surveillance Devices Act 2007 (NSW).

Today FM brought proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia seeking declarations and injunctions against ACMA. They argued (1) that ACMA was not authorised to determine the breach of the licence condition issue until a competent court had determined that Today FM had committed the Surveillance Devices Act offices and (2) in the alternative, that if ACMA was so authorised, the legislation was invalid because of its inconsistency with the separation of judicial and executive powers in the Constitution.

The Federal Court dismissed the matter but on appeal the Full Court of the Federal Court allowed an appeal on the grounds of the first argument.

Special leave was granted for ACMA to appeal to the High Court of Australia. The High Court allowed the appeal, holding that ACMA has the power to make an administrative determination that a licensee has committed a criminal offence (under the Surveillance Devices Act), notwithstanding there being no court determination of the offence as the tribunal is not exercising judicial power not adjudging or punishing criminal guilt.

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Korda v Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Limited [2015] HCA 6

ON 4 MARCH 2015, the High Court of Australia delivered Korda v Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Limited [2015] HCA 6 (4 March 2015).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2015/6.html

The High Court allowed an appeal against a decision of the Victorian Court of Appeal, declaring that the respondent was not entitled to certain monies that were payable to a forest company (“the third appellant”) under Land Sale Contracts and a milling company (“the fourth appellant”) pursuant to a tree Sale Agreement. The Court held that the proceeds of the sale of at the timber and land scheme payable to the third and fourth respondent were not subject to an express trust in favour of the scheme of investors.

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Appointment of Justin Smith to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia

On 27 JANUARY 2015, Mr Justin Smith SC was appointed as a judge of the Federal Court of Australia.

According to the Federal Attorney General:

“Mr Smith graduated from the University of Sydney in 1991 with a Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Laws. He was admitted to practice in the Supreme Court of New South Wales in 1992 and was appointed Senior Counsel earlier this year.
Mr Smith’s primary areas of practice are administrative law (including migration, customs and taxation law), commercial and equity law, insolvency, succession and regulatory and disciplinary cases as well as varied appellate work. Mr Smith volunteered at Redfern Legal Centre between 1993 and 1997, where he provided free legal advice and took on pro bono matters both at trial and on appeal.”

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Appointment of Ian Newbrun to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia

ON 4 FEBRUARY 2015, Ian Newbrun was appointed as a judge of the Federal Court of Australia.

According to the Federal Attorney General:

“Mr Newbrun graduated with a Bachelor of Laws from the University of Sydney in 1979 and a Masters of Laws from the London School of Economics and Political Science in 1981. He was admitted to practice in the Supreme Court of New South Wales in 1982.
Mr Newbrun’s primary areas of practice are common law actions, will disputes, insurance law, contractual and other commercial disputes and administrative law. He is currently the New South Wales Chairperson of the Federal Medicare Participation Review Committee and a Deputy Chairperson of the New South Wales Health Profession Tribunals since 2012. He has been a panel advisor to the New South Wales Refugee Review Tribunal Legal Advice Scheme. Mr Newbrun is a qualified arbitrator hearing referred actions from the NSW Local and District Courts.”

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Appointment of Salvatore Vasta to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia

On 1 JANUARY 2015, Mr Salvatore Vasta was appointed as a member of the Federal Court of Australia.

According to the Federal Attorney General:

“Mr Vasta graduated from the University of Queensland with a Bachelor of Arts in 1984. He graduated from the Barrister’s Admission Board in 1990 and was admitted to practice in the Supreme Court of Queensland that same year. Mr Vasta was admitted to practice in the High Court of Australia in 2003.
Mr Vasta started his legal career as a legal officer in the Queensland Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) in 1990. During his career, he has been a Queensland Crown Prosecutor, Senior Crown Prosecutor and is the current Principal Crown Prosecutor at the Queensland ODPP.
Mr Vasta is a Member of the Bar Association of Queensland and is the Deputy Chairman of the Queensland Cricket Board. He is the Vice-President of the International Association of Prosecutors and the President of the Crown Prosecutors Association of Queensland.”

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088