© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[1999] HCA 61
High Court of Australia
1999-11-10
Gleeson CJ, Hayne JJ
Original judgment source is linked above.
The applicant urged that s 364 of the Act gives me power to make the orders he seeks. That section provides that: "The Court shall be guided by the substantial merits and good conscience of each case without regard to legal forms or technicalities, or whether the evidence before it is in accordance with the law of evidence or not."
Broad as that provision may be, it does not confer a jurisdiction on the Court which it does not otherwise have under the Act. Nor does it dispense with the requirements of the Act. It merely requires that the Court should not be unduly formal or technical in the conduct of proceedings under the Act and enables it to depart from the rules of evidence.
Rudolphy
Lightfoot
High Court of Australia Gleeson CJ Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow and Hayne JJ Rudolphy v Lightfoot (P22/1999) [1999] HCA 61
(1922) 31 CLR 76
(1962) 108 CLR 471
(1995) 184 CLR 265
(1997) 188 CLR 114
(1904) 1 CLR 314
(1978) 52 ALJR 359
(1988) 167 CLR 133
(1993) 67 ALJR 714
(1993) 67 ALJR 818