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: Howard J
Before: Gill J
Before: M Osborne J
Before: Tang AM
Before: Application DP
Before: Ball JA
Before: Dickson C
Before: Peatman AC
Before: Pritchard J
Before: Cole DCJ
Before: Payne JA at [1], Harrison JA at [2], Griffiths AJA at [3]
The deed allowed Lendlease to vary the proposed subdivision, but not to replace the agreed plan with one that was no longer based upon it. The Court upheld the finding that Lendlease’s July 2024 plan did not meet that requirement. The deed also treated the five property purchases as sequential and linked later option periods to completion of the first contract. Because the first contract could no longer be completed, the Court agreed with the primary judge’s reasoning that the later acquisitions could not proceed. The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Before: Adamson JA at [1]Ball JA at [2]Price AJA at [44]
Townsend argued that the ADP had focused too much on why he resigned in September 2023, rather than whether his hip condition made him unable to work from 3 November 2023. The Court of Appeal rejected that argument. The circumstances at resignation mattered because the claim concerned whether his capacity changed after he left work. The ADP had considered the evidence and explained why it did not establish that change. The Court also found that the appellant misunderstood the Member’s reference to full-time ordinary duties. The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Before: Moore J
Before: Gleeson JJ
The High Court held that the Minister could not change the rent calculation for these public-housing tenants without first giving them reasonable notice and an opportunity to comment. Although the rent model came from a general policy, the determinations applied it to individual tenancies and affected tenants' particular rent obligations. Their submissions could realistically have affected the amounts, timing, community coverage or operation of the Safety Net. The failure was therefore material, and the three determinations were quashed. The Court did not decide whether the determinations were legally unreasonable.
Before: Senior Member J