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: Tasmania Crawford CJ
Before: Balla AJ
Before: Bell CJ at [1], Ward P at [105], andMitchelmore JA at [106].
The Court of Appeal held that the later written agreement, not the earlier handwritten agreement, governed the parties’ arrangement. It required Mr Touma to pay $20,000 each month, and he did not do so after December 2014. Mr Balout had notified him of the default, and the promised catch-up payments were not made. The Court held that Mr Touma consequently lost his rights to the returns under cl 5, including the claimed $1 million. It allowed the appeal and dismissed the Respondents’ summons. Other issues about the settlement and alleged nondisclosure were not needed to reach that result, although the Court discussed them.
Before: Bell CJ, Leeming JA, Free JA
The Act allowed the President or Speaker to certify that a witness had failed to attend a parliamentary committee without a reasonable excuse. Once a judge received the certificate, the judge had to issue a warrant. The warrant did more than bring the witness before Parliament: it also authorised detention under later orders of the President or Speaker. The Court held that this mandatory process made the judge a functionary and attached the Court’s authority to parliamentary decisions about detention, including future detention the judge could not assess. That substantially impaired the Supreme Court’s institutional independence and impartiality, so ss 7–9 were invalid.
Before: Moshinsky J
Before: Bennett J
Before: Hartnett J
Before: Harman J, Riethmuller J
Before: McNab JJ