Waterfront Place v Minister [2019] VSCA 156
This appeal from a case in Episode 42 is about the meaning of ‘no later than’ in VCAT notice-giving provisions. Refusing the appeal, the court focussed on the interpretation provision about calculating time5, and whether a ‘contrary intention’ excluded its operation. It was argued that the absence of uncertainty amounted to …
Klemweb Nominees v BHP [2019] FCAFC 107
The key quote from this class action case on common fund orders (at [138]) is that policy ‘divorced from law has no voice in the courts’9. It was argued that the policy behind another provision in a different statute controlled interpretation of federal class action provisions – rejected.
Policy can be …
Fairfax Media v Gayle [2019] NSWCA 172
Chris Gayle the cricketer sued Fairfax for defamation – it was in all the papers. Leeming JA (at [258-259]) commented on the ‘symbiotic relationship’ between statutes and the common law11. They are not separate and independent sources of law, he said.
This is a subtle and difficult area, but with practical …
GHJ v Dept of Justice (No 2) [2019] VSC 411
Where a statute contains what was called a ‘defined decision making structure’, this should be followed even if the primary value expressed in a general objects clause may favour a different outcome.
In this child-worker vetting case, the power to give a negative notice was limited to 3 defined situations…
R v Cumberland [2019] NTCCA 13
What non-parole period applies where a sentence includes offences for which minimum non-parole periods of both 70% or 50% are specified?2 Courts normally favour leniency in penal situations, but this is now a rule of last ‘last resort’ 3. Accordingly, the court applied the ordinary rules of interpretation.
This led …
TRG v Brisbane Grammar School [2019] QSC 157
TRG sought, under limitation provisions5, an order setting aside a settlement agreement so that fresh proceedings could be taken against the school. Davis J refused to do so and (at [148]) commented on the proper way to identify statutory purpose.
The search is never for any subjectively held purpose of …
CCA19 v Dept of Home Affairs [2019] FCA 946
Project Blue Sky accepts that context may require statutory words to bear an ungrammatical meaning8. Our ‘modern approach’ also includes the limited ability to add or subtract words from legislation in correction of minor drafting errors9. This case sets out how these 2 themes interact.
Bromberg J …
Spence v Queensland [2019] HCA 15
This case involved the validity of provisions that purport to enable retention of gifts for non-electoral purposes. Section 15A of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 requires Acts to be read subject to the Constitution, and any enactment in excess of power ‘shall nevertheless be a valid enactment to the extent to which it is …
Bluescope Steel v AWU [2019] FCAFC 84
This case (at [54]) reminds us that, where a phrase is given a particular meaning by the court, other grammatical forms of that phrase (often called cognate or derivative expressions) have ‘similar effect’ where repeated in a later statute.
The High Court, in an earlier case, had determined that the phrase ‘ordinary time …
Goodacre v Lumbers [2019] WASC 184
Simple words sometimes cause unexpected complication. Did a cyber-stalking order prohibiting use of ‘the internet and any social network’ require the use of both for an offence to be committed? 9 The word ‘and’ is usually read conjunctively according to its ordinary meaning, but not always.
In this case, Derrick J (at [57]) read …
