Principles

Mangoola v Muswellbrook SC [2023] NSWCA 275

Mangoola sought to recover $3m in overpaid council rates.  The Act said action for amounts ‘recoverable on restitutionary grounds’ had to be commenced within 12 months¹¹ – not met.  Mangoola argued that this deadline did not apply to statutory claims.

Leeming JA said context and purpose made it clear the Act was …

Karpik v Carnival plc [2023] HCA 39

Passengers who caught COVID on a cruise sued the vessel owner under unfair contract provisions in the Australian Consumer Law¹³.  One issue was whether the consumer provisions applied to contracts made offshore and to things done outside Australia.

Where the presumption of extraterritoriality arises, the ‘starting point is always the interpretation …

Kingston v Transport for Victoria [2023] VSC 618

In this case, Quigley J examines the interpretation principles applicable to compulsory acquisition. 

First, the right to compensation is ‘entirely statutory’⁶.  Second, although these statutes are subject to the usual rules of interpretation, ‘obscure matters should be resolved in favour of the dispossessed party’⁷. Third, this means that …

Jusand Nominees v Rattlejack [2023] FCAFC 178

An issue in this infringement case was whether the patent specification disclosed and supported the invention⁹.  The statutory requirements had been amended to align our law with offshore practice.  On the basis they were ‘ambiguous’ under s 15AB(1)(b)(i) of the Acts Interpretation Act, Perram J had regard to extrinsic materials …

EPA v Sydney Water [2023] NSWLEC 119

SW resisted a subpoena for documents because their sole purpose was that of a ‘voluntary environmental audit’ (protected).  The interpretation point was how this composite expression was to be construed. 

Moore J said the ‘task is to construe the language of the statute, not individual words’¹¹.  Composite expressions are …

Russell v R [2023] NSWCCA 272

This ‘extreme body modification’ case is a sequel to the genital mutilation decision, R v A2 [2019] HCA 35.  R was convicted of genital mutilation¹⁴ – labiaplasty on a consenting adult female.  He appealed on the basis High Court dicta made it clear the offence was confined to ritual acts committed on female …

AER v Pelican Point Ltd [2023] FCA 1110

A regulator sought declarations that Pelican had under-reported the electricity it could produce on a given day.  Pelican argued that any doubt or ambiguity in the civil penalty provisions should be resolved in its favour.  Besanko J (at [680]) agreed generally².

This is similar to criminal situations where, if real …

Croc’s Franchising v Alamdo [2023] NSWCA 256

Did COVID regulations protect Croc’s as an ‘impacted lessee’ from termination by Alamdo?⁴  Clause 7 required regard be had to National Code principles when decisions affected ‘impacted lessees’.

While ordinary interpretation principles apply to delegated legislation⁵, that legislation will often not be drafted with the same care as statutes…

Granville Hotel v ILGA [2023] NSWCA 248

Granville’s application to operate pokies late at night was rejected on the basis there were insufficient gaming ‘venues’ proximate to the hotel.  The dispute turned solely on whether ‘venues’ in a guideline⁸ included the singular⁹.  Granville argued it should.

Kirk JA (at [32]) accepted that the Interpretation Act applied to …

Raiz v PSR (No 2) [2023] FCA 1293

Dr Raiz challenged referral of a complaint to a committee.  He said a prior ‘inclination to refer’ was itself a ‘decision’ which was flawed because his submissions had not been taken into account¹¹.  The issue was what is meant by ‘make a referral’¹². 

The judge held no ‘decision’ …