Case law library
Australian case law library
Search court decisions by neutral citation, case name, jurisdiction, court, judges, catchwords, and judgment summary.
Case law entry points
Start with judgments that other decisions keep coming back to, then follow the citations through the case graph.
NCAT Appeal Panel | 2014-04-09
Tenants were terminated for non-payment of rent following an uncontested hearing where the landlord's agent gave evidence and the Member recorded findings in hearing notes. The tenants sought leave to internally appeal under s 80(2)(b) but did not raise any question of law; therefore leave required. Clause 12 Schedule 4 requires showing the appellant 'may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice' because the decision was unfair, against the weight of evidence, or there is significant new evidence. The tenants relied on phone logs and asserted contact and willingness to pay. The Appeal Panel found the record disclosed arrears and necessary findings, the phone logs were not fresh or persuasive, and there was no denial of procedural fairness. Leave was refused, the appeal dismissed, and the stay of the original orders lifted.
1,627 case citations
Before: Galwey AC
Before: Berman AJ
Before: Taylor J
Before: French J, Gleeson CJ, McHugh J, Street J, Madgwick J, Flick JJ, Kirby J
Before: Payne JAMcHugh JAPreston CJ of LEC
The Court of Appeal dismissed the Valuer General's challenge to land values set by the Land and Environment Court for four Strathfield parcels. The appeal could succeed only on a question of law. The Court found that the primary judge had not treated every sale as having equal valuation significance: he assessed and adjusted each sale, then used the median and average only as statistics to help select a rate. The Valuation of Land Act did not require the judge to follow the specific four-step process described in Marroun, nor did it prohibit calculating or considering an average. The primary judge's reasons adequately explained how the rates were reached. The Valuer General was ordered to pay the respondent's appeal costs.
Before: M Tyson, Senior MemberJ Sullivan, Senior Member
Before: S de Jersey, Principal MemberG K Burton SC, Senior Member
Before: Neilson DCJ
Before: Peatman AC
Before: Espinosa C
Before: Walsh C
Before: Washington C
Before: Espinosa C
Before: Emmett J
Before: Williams J
Before: Mullins P, Brown JA, Doyle JA
The Queensland Court of Appeal set aside MEZ's conviction because the evidence, considered as a whole, did not justify the jury's conclusion beyond reasonable doubt. The court focused not on any single inconsistency but on their combined significance, including the complainant's similar complaint about another person, her acknowledged memory and trauma difficulties, and the fact that she said MEZ's wife witnessed the incident when the wife denied being present. Because the jury had been directed to accept the complainant's full account to convict, it could not simply disregard the disputed witness-presence detail. The court found a significant possibility that an innocent person had been convicted and ordered an acquittal. It separately held that the judge's response to the jury's question about the complainant's health was not a misdirection.
Before: Mullins P, Henry J, Sullivan J
The Court of Appeal held that the extra promises made in March did not make the buyer’s payment at settlement conditional on their performance. The standard contract expressly linked payment and specified settlement documents by saying they were exchanged for one another. The later amendments did not use comparable words, and references to performance “prior to settlement” fixed the time for performance only. The court also found that the alleged breaches did not give the buyer a right to terminate and did not prevent the seller from relying on the buyer’s failure to settle. It therefore upheld summary judgment for the seller and dismissed the appeal.
Before: McCafferty J