Case Law

Case Summarises provided by A R Conolly & Company Lawyers in their daily newsletter Benchmark.

As new technologies emerge and work practices evolve, new situations arise and responsibilities shift, with these changes affecting how policies are interpreted and respond. Court cases illustrate these changing conditions, and provide valuable information as to how and why a determination was made. Cases occur every day, with the outcomes underpinning many current trends while throwing others to the wind. To keep abreast of these changes and for interesting reading, visit our Case Law facility regularly to search the library or view the latest cases.

From To
Advanced search

Top 5 latest case law

TitleCaseHighlightHearing Date
Wing v The Australian Broadcasting Corporation [2018] FCA 1340 Federal Court of AustraliaPleadings - defamation - applicant sought to strike out defences of justification and supporting particulars, on basis no defence disclosed, or on basis of ‘prejudice, embarrassment and delay' - respondents sought to file amended defence - whether ‘variant imputations' disclosed reasonable defence - whether amended particulars imprecise or embarrassing to extent they did not give ‘fair indication of the case' to be met by applicant - whether particulars capable of establishing imputations' truth - ‘Polly Peck' defence - ‘Hore-Lacey' defence - rr16.41 &16.43 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) - ss8, 24 & 25 Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) - held: particulars on which respondents sought to rely in amended defence struck out - defences of justification in filed defence, which relied on the particulars in the amended defence, also struck out.09/11/2018
Romanoski v Clean Solutions Pty Ltd [2018] VSC 526 Supreme Court of VictoriaEvidence - video evidence - negligence - plaintiff was employed by defendant - plaintiff sued defendant in negligence for alleged personal injury in course of employment - defendant filed notice of requirement for jury - plaintiff had ‘significant criminal history' - defendant sought to show surveillance video of plaintiff - ‘unfair prejudice' - whether video's probative value ‘substantially outweighed' by danger to plaintiff of unfair prejudice - held: Court satisfied to show video evidence to jury.09/11/2018
Qantas Airways Limited v Ardlie [2018] FCAFC 154 Full Court of the Federal Court of AustraliaIndustrial law - respondents were employed by appellant - five respondents commenced proceedings against appellant in Industrial Relations Court of South Australia (IRCSA), alleging appellant had contravened s50 Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) by its failure to make payments according to terms of enterprise agreement made under the Act - Industrial Magistrate found in respondent's favour - IRCSA dissolved - South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) required appellant to make payments to respondents - appellant appealed - whether employees correctly classified in accordance with enterprise agreement - “working up the scale” - Constitutional validity of IRCSA's dissolution, and of provision in respect of proceedings' transfer to SAET - held: Industrial Magistrate did not determine employees' classification in manner which enterprise agreement required - Industrial Magistrate's error affected orders made by SAET - ‘constitutional question' did no arise - appeal allowed.09/11/2018
Petrovic v Victorian WorkCover Authority [2018] VSCA 243 Court of Appeal of VictoriaAccident compensation - applicant sought, pursuant to s134AB(16)(b) Accident Compensation Act 1985 (Vic), to commence common law proceeding seeking damages for a psychiatric condition resulting from witnessing work accident - primary judge dismissed application, finding applicant failed to satisfy her that he suffered psychiatric condition due to witnessing the accident - ‘serious injury' - credit - whether erroneous treatment of affidavit of applicant's father - whether erroneous preference of one expert's opinion over the opinion of other experts - held: applicant's appeal had no prospects of success - leave to appeal refused.09/11/2018
Nguyen v Valore [2018] NSWSC 1364 Supreme Court of New South WalesLeases and tenancies - plaintiff was lessee of commercial premises from defendants as lessors - plaintiff sought declaration he was not in breach of lease's provisions - plaintiff also sought, pursuant to s133F Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW), relief permitting him to exercise option lease - s129 Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) - held: plaintiff had breached lease in only one respect concerning erection of wall - there were mitigating factors - no breakdown in relationship and ‘continued cooperation' required for lease's ‘proper functioning' - ‘not seriously challenged' that plaintiff would lose business if he had to move - Court satisfied to grant relief under s133F on condition of wall's removal - parties to bring in short minutes to give effect to reasons.09/11/2018