Harris v Military Rehabilitation [2025] FCA 381
In this case, McEvoy J (at [26]) quotes as follows10 –
‘The current approach to statutory interpretation involves courts assuming that those drafting legislation, and parliaments which enact it, are familiar with the general principles of statutory construction, and that courts will take statutory language as they find it, read with the …
Gamage v Riashi [2025] NSWCA 84
At issue was whether ICAC could itself launch prosecutions against persons it had investigated. Basten AJA answered ‘no’. There was no express or incidental power permitting ICAC to launch prosecutions14. This was despite the fact later parliamentary debates on amendments had referred to the ‘practice’ of ICAC commencing prosecutions which were later …
In 2021, the High Court said the principles of interpretation are ‘familiar’, adding – ‘Oftentimes they can seem banal’1. The sense of this is that the principles are trite, commonplace or mundane. Gageler J described them as ‘workaday’2. A recent case observes again (A) that the principles are ‘well established’, and (B) that the language of …
Bogan v Estate of Smedley [2025] HCA 7
The general prohibition of contingency fees is subject to an exception in Victoria for ‘group costs orders’. It was held that making an order of this kind was relevant to whether the proceedings should be transferred to NSW. The transferee court was required to deal with the proceeding ‘as if’ steps taken …
Hanave [2025] NSWLEC 19, Hixson [2025] NSWSC 192
Two aspects of transitional provisions are touched on in these cases. Hanave (at [62]), emphasises their temporary nature. The judge observed that ‘transitional’ means passing from one condition to another. It was added that provisions of this kind are meant to be ‘passing’ and not forever applicable.
In Hixson (at [55]) …
Billyard Ave v Sydney City [2025] NSWLEC 22
Walsh C had refused a DA due to inconsistency with the objectives of the development zone in question9. The first objective of the R1 zone was ‘to provide for the housing needs of the community’. Walsh C construed this objective by reference to expert opinion and party evidence on what …
ZeroBonds v Commissioner [2025] NSWSC 265
This case is about the phrase ‘before or when’ in residential bond provisions13. Refusing declarations sought by Z, Brereton J held the phrase was used in a temporal sense rather than in a conditional sense.
In the former, the words ‘before’ and ‘when’ had different meanings, but in the latter they ‘usually …
An old nuclear test compensation case was mentioned at a recent conference1. Despite the remedial nature of the statute in question2, the High Court denied relief to a RAAF airman who had unloaded contaminated planes. As the statutory meaning was clear, the majority refused to read the extra words ‘of a kind’ into the provisions. Stephen …
WC Nominal Insurer v Sako [2025] NSWCA 12
‘Hitting the target’ is an old phrase heard more and more6. It signifies two things. First, that a solution be sought which coherently gives effect to statutory purpose. Second, that there is a constructive duty on all interpreters to try to hit the legislative target.
The issue in Sako was …
WCX v Homebuilding [2025] NSWCA 16
A builder obtained judgment against C who held a line of credit from a funder. The Sheriff sought to execute on property of C which the funder then claimed. It was argued the Sheriff acted unlawfully, as ‘functions in relation to … any legal proceedings to which the Sheriff is a party … are …
