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.
1,764 case citations
Before: Wilson J
Before: Brasch J
Before: Ms J
Before: Needham J
Before: McElwaine J
Before: Kennett J
Before: Agency Ltd J, Dowling J
Before: Derrington J
Mr Blakey was fired from his job as a spray painter and filed his unfair dismissal claim 16 days late. He said he couldn't file on time because he was suffering from anxiety and depression after losing his job and his relationship. However, the Fair Work Commission found that his mental health issues weren't severe enough to stop him from filing the claim or talking to his representative, especially since he was able to do some work during that time. The Commission also noted that he had a representative who tried to contact him, but he didn't respond. Because there were no 'exceptional circumstances' justifying the delay, the Commission refused to extend the time and dismissed his application.
Before: Lee J
Before: Moshinsky J
Before: Kirk and Ball JJA at [1], Griffiths AJA at [19]
The Court of Appeal dismissed the challenge to the District Court’s costs orders. The judgment did not decide precisely which statutory provision Hanley DCJ relied on, because the applicants had not shown that he relied only on the inapplicable CDPV Act provisions. The CAR Act supplied an available costs power, the applicants had notice of that power, and the judge’s findings supported an implicit decision that costs were just. The omission of a payment deadline did not invalidate the orders in the context of the modern costs assessment and enforcement system.
Before: Bell CJ, Payne JA, Ball JA
The Court found that the Magistrate’s private conversation with the prosecutor during the hearing created a reasonable appearance of possible bias and was jurisdictional error. But Khamiss had appealed to the District Court, and that appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution. The Court interpreted the governing Act to mean that dismissal of the appeal confirmed the Local Court conviction, even though the District Court did not hear the appeal on its merits. Since the District Court’s order was not itself affected by jurisdictional error, the Local Court decision was no longer the operative order that the Court of Appeal could quash. The judicial review application was therefore dismissed with costs.
Before: P Durack SC, Senior MemberR Perrignon, Senior Member
Before: Member Decision, Member Molony, Member Montgomery
Before: Bell CJ at [1], Price AJA at [2], Ierace J at [3]
Before: Newlinds SC DCJ
Before: Dickson C
Before: Thorpe AC