Mondelez v AMWU [2019] FCAFC 138
For each year of service, an employee was ‘entitled to 10 days of paid personal/carer’s leave’6. X worked three 12 hour shifts a week, rather than standard hours for the same total. Was X entitled to 10 days at 7.2 hours per day under the ‘industrial’ meaning of ‘day’, or 10 days …
Fitzpatrick v Lifetime Support [2019] SASCFC 97
A scheme for future care10 sought to exclude rights to common law damages11. Legislation is usually not read this way unless a contrary intention appears12. In this case, however, there was an unmistakeable policy to exclude those rights, manifested by the alternative compensation the scheme provided.
A narrow …
The first thing about statutory interpretation is to understand the basic principles. Courts last month reminded us these are ‘well known’ and ‘not overly complex’1. Middleton J tells us to be guided by common sense, not blinded by ‘over-analysis’2. This reflects the general anti-linguistic approach required by the High Court. Context and purpose point the way, …
Satmell v Blacktown CC [2019] NSWLEC 94
Identifying the purpose of provisions at the correct level is ‘integral’ to interpretation3 because purpose drives constructional choice, consistent with s 15AA of the Acts Interpretation Act 19014. Even though purpose resides in the text and structure of the statute, it may be derived from external sources.
This case (at …
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 …
Spanning 50 episodes, interpretation NOW! has developed into an important public resource from the ATO on interpretation principles. Now we have established www.interpretationnow.com giving you the ability to search, access and link to all the available data. You can do this on any device you want and click-thru to primary sources, like all the important High Court cases. Everything is …
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 …
