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: Leeming JA
Before: McWilliam J
Before: Kirby J
The Fair Work Commission dismissed a general protections application because the employee had voluntarily resigned rather than being dismissed. The employee claimed he was forced to resign due to various issues including contact during leave, safety concerns, and workplace behaviour. The Commission found that while the employee subjectively felt pressured, objectively he had real choices available to him. He held a senior position, failed to use formal complaint procedures or escalate concerns to more senior management, and could have redirected work enquiries during his leave. The Commission emphasised that for a resignation to count as a dismissal, the employer's conduct must be such that the employee had no effective or real choice but to resign. Here, alternatives existed and the employee's decision to resign was voluntary.
Before: Ward P at [1]Adamson JA at [2]McHugh JA at [89]
The Court of Appeal corrected the way the trial judgment had understood a figure in a payment schedule and independently assessed the disputed transactions. It found that three of the four disputed loans were proved, and that only one of the five disputed payments was proved as a repayment of principal. The resulting balance was higher than the existing judgment. The son's limitation argument also failed because he had not pleaded or appropriately claimed the statutory defence. The appeal was dismissed, leaving the judgment unchanged, with costs against the appellant.
Before: Bell CJ at [1], Leeming JA at [61], McHugh JA at [65].
The applicants wanted to appeal a decision that corrected company share registers to reflect their sister's interests under their mother's will. They argued that evidence about their guarantees, financing and development work should have been admitted to support a defence of laches. The Court of Appeal held that the relevant particulars had been expressly abandoned, that the asserted prejudice had not been properly set out in the defence, and that the applicants had not shown the respondent's delay caused their financial commitments. The primary judge's evidentiary rulings did not establish the kind of injustice required for leave to appeal, so leave was refused with costs.
Before: Price AJA
The Court did not decide whether Saigal had a psychiatric condition. It decided that the evidence did not show that, at the relevant time, he was unable to understand the matters he needed to understand to conduct this particular appeal. The medical report discussed his condition and personal affairs but did not answer that litigation-specific question. The Court therefore refused to declare him under legal incapacity and dismissed the proposed tutor’s application as well.
Before: Beasley J
Before: McHugh JA
Before: Fagan J
Before: Weinstein J
Before: Williams J