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: Bell CJ at [1], Kirk JA at [128], Ball JA at [129].
Hartnett appealed after the trial judge found that he had not proved that he suffered serious physical abuse at school in the early 1990s. The Court of Appeal upheld that result. It said the trial judge was best placed to assess the many conflicting witnesses, and the appeal did not show that the findings were glaringly improbable. The Court also found no relevant error in the trial judge's interpretation of the statutory phrase “serious physical abuse”. It rejected the argument that the High Court's decision in AA required a new method for deciding whether historic abuse occurred: delay and memory problems can be considered, but they do not decide the case by themselves. The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Before: Stern JA
TEG Live asked the Court of Appeal to set a single amount for costs rather than send them to a formal assessment. The Court considered only the appeal costs and the part of the motion relating to those costs. It found that the available invoices and evidence allowed a fair estimate, but that some legal costs were disproportionate to the relatively confined appeal. It ordered $84,500 for the appeal and $5,000 for the relevant part of the motion. Interest on the appeal costs runs from 25 March 2025 because TEG Live brought its motion later than the Court considered reasonable. The Court did not decide the first instance costs claim, leaving open a separate application concerning those costs.
Before: I R Coleman SC ADCJ, Principal MemberN Kennedy, Senior Member
Before: Armstrong J, PresidentR Booby, Principal MemberF Given, General, Member
Before: G Sarginson, Deputy President
Before: M Tibbey, Senior MemberS Hennings, Senior Member
Before: J Sullivan, Senior MemberG Burton SC, Senior Member
Before: Dixon SC and Sherry AC
Before: Gray C
Before: Targett C
Before: Targett C
Before: Davidson AC
Before: Targett C
Before: Targett C
Before: Griffiths AJ
Before: Harrison AJ
Before: Hindman J, Mullins P, Brown JA, Bradley JA
A defendant's counterclaim does not lose the benefit of the limitation relation-back rule merely because it was filed late or irregularly under Queensland's procedural rules. If the underlying claim was still within time when the plaintiff started the main proceeding, s 42 LAA can treat the counterclaim as having started on that earlier date. A late counterclaim is a separate claim, not an amendment to the defence, and the court may decide whether to regularise its filing. Later amendments to the counterclaim are a different matter and may have to meet the UCPR's amendment restrictions.
Before: Mr J, Ms J
Before: Mr P
Before: COSGRAVE J