Legal Research
Cases
High Court Bulletin

High Court Bulletin

Link copied

Case Copied 18 May 2012 52 min read

Contents

On this page

High Court Bulletin

Produced by the Legal Research Officer,
High Court of Australia Library

[2012] HCAB 05 (18 May 2012)

A record of recent High Court of Australia cases: decided, reserved for judgment, awaiting hearing in the Court’s original jurisdiction, granted special leave to appeal, refused special leave to appeal and not proceeding or vacated

1: Cases Handed Down
2: Cases Reserved
3: Original Jurisdiction
4: Special Leave Granted
5: Cases Not Proceeding or Vacated
6: Special Leave Refused

Summary of New Entries

1: Cases Handed Down

Case	Title
Crump v State of New South Wales	Constitutional Law
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Hellicar; Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Brown; Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Gillfillan; Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Koffel; Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Terry; Australian Securities and Investments Commission v O'Brien; Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Willcox; Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Shafron	Corporations Law
Shafron v Australian Securities and Investments	Corporations Law
Australian Education Union v General Manager of Fair Work Australia & Ors	Statutes

2: Cases Reserved

Case	Title
Mansfield v The Queen; Kizon v The Queen	Corporations Law
Burns v The Queen	Criminal Law
Papaconstuntinos v Holmes a Court	Defamation
PT Garuda Indonesia Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission	Private International Law
Barclay v Penberthy & Ors	Torts

3: Original Jurisdiction

Case	Title
There are no new matters ready for hearing in the original jurisdiction of the High Court since High Court Bulletin 4 [2012] HCAB 04.

4: Special Leave Granted

Case	Title
Attorney-General for the State of South Australia v Corporation of the City of Adelaide & Ors	Constitutional Law
The Public Service Association and Professional Officers' Association Amalgamated of NSW v Director of Public Employment & Ors	Constitutional Law
Andrews & Ors v Australian and New Zealand Banking Group Limited – Matter Removed to HCA	Contract Law
Cooper v The Queen	Criminal Law
Douglass v The Queen	Criminal Law

1: Cases Handed Down

The following cases were handed down by the High Court of Australia during the May 2012 sittings.

Constitutional Law

Crump v State of New South Wales

S165/2011: [2012] HCA 20.

Judgment delivered: 4 May 2012.

Coram: French CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell JJ.

Catchwords:

Constitutional law (Cth) – Judicial power of Commonwealth – Constitution, Ch III – Sentencing and parole procedure – Whether determination made under s 13A of Sentencing Act 1989 (NSW) is a "matter" within s 73 of Constitution – Whether s 154A of Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) invalid for setting aside, varying, altering or otherwise stultifying a judgment, decree, order or sentence of Ch III court.

This matter was filed in the original jurisdiction of the High Court.

Corporations Law

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Hellicar; Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Brown; Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Gillfillan; Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Koffel; Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Terry; Australian Securities and Investments…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read High Court Bulletin and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2012] HCAB 5
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Crump v State of New South Wales concerned the judicial power of the Commonwealth. The case considered whether the determination made under s 13A of the Sentencing Act 1989 (NSW) was a "matter" within s 73 of the Constitution. The Court found that s 154A of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) was invalid for setting aside, varying, altering or otherwise stultifying a judgment, decree, order or sentence of a Ch III court. Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Hellicar and others concerned the duties and liabilities of directors and officers. The Court considered whether directors contravened s 180(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) by approving a draft announcement that was materially different from a misleading announcement released to the Australian Stock Exchange. The Court found that the Australian Securities and Investments Commission did not owe a duty of fairness to the respondents in its conduct of the litigation. The Court also held that the board minutes were sufficient evidence to prove the directors' approval of the draft announcement. Shafron v Australian Securities and Investments Commission concerned the definition of "officer" in the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). The Court considered whether a company secretary and general counsel of a corporation was an officer within the meaning of the Act. The Court held that the responsibilities of a company secretary and general counsel were not necessarily divisible and that the scope of "responsibilities within the corporation" of an officer should be determined by the duties they performed. Australian Education Union v General Manager of Fair Work Australia and Others concerned the interpretation of statutory provisions and the presumption against retrospective operation. The Court considered whether a section of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (Cth) operated to validate the registration of an organisation that was previously found to be invalid. The Court held that the section did not operate to validate the registration and that it did not impermissibly usurp or interfere with the exercise of Commonwealth judicial power.

Orders