Legal Research
Cases
High Court Bulletin

High Court Bulletin

Case [2022] HCAB 1 18 February 2022

Jurisdiction

Constitutional Validity

Separation of Powers

Limitation Periods

Judicial Review

Natural Justice & Procedural Fairness

Administrative Law

Constitutional Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

High Court Bulletin

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

[2022] HCAB 1 (18 February 2022)

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: Summary of New Entries
2: Cases Handed Down
3: Cases Reserved
4: Original Jurisdiction
5: Section 40 Removal
6: Special Leave Granted
7: Cases Not Proceeding or Vacated
8: Special Leave Refused

1: Summary of New Entries

2: Cases Handed Down

Case	Title
Walton & Anor v ACN 004 410 833 Ltd (formerly Arrium Ltd) (in liquidation) & Ors	Companies
Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Personnel Contracting Pty Ltd	Industrial Law
ZG Operations Australia Pty Ltd v Jamsek	Industrial Law

3: Cases Reserved

Case	Title
Citta Hobart Pty Ltd & Anor v Cawthorn	Constitutional Law
Delil Alexander (by his litigation guardian Berivan Alexander) v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor	Constitutional Law
Farm Transparency International Ltd & Anor v State of New South Wales	Constitutional Law
Ruddick v Commonwealth of Australia	Constitutional Law

4: Original Jurisdiction

5: Section 40 Removal

6: Special Leave Granted

Case	Title
SDCV v Director-General of Security & Anor	Administrative Law
Dansie v The Queen	Criminal Law
Hore v The Queen; Wichen v The Queen	Criminal Law
BHP Group Limited v Impiombato & Anor	Representative Proceedings

7: Cases Not Proceeding or Vacated

8: Special Leave Refused

2: Cases Handed Down

The following cases were handed down by the High Court of Australia during the February 2022 sittings.

Companies

Walton & Anor v ACN 004 410 833 Ltd (formerly Arrium Ltd) (in liquidation) & Ors

S20/2021: [2022] HCA 3

Judgment delivered: 16 February 2022

Coram: Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Keane, Edelman and Steward JJ

Catchwords:

Companies – Winding up – Mandatory examination of persons about examinable affairs of corporation – Application to set aside summons for examination – Purposes for which an officer or provisional liquidator may be summoned for examination about corporation's examinable affairs pursuant to s 596A of Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – Where appellants were shareholders of corporation in liquidation – Where appellants authorised by Australian Securities and Investments Commission to make application pursuant to s 596A of Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – Where appellants applied for summons for purpose of investigating potential personal claims in capacity as shareholders against former directors and auditors of corporation – Where Registrar issued summons to former director to attend court for examination – Whether appellants' purpose foreign to purpose of s 596A of Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – Whether examination an abuse of process.
Words and phrases – "abuse of process", "benefit of the company, its creditors, or its contributories", "corporation in external administration", "eligible applicant", "enforcement of the law", "examinable affairs", "predominant purpose", "public administration and compliance", "public interest", "purpose of the examination", "scope and purpose of a statutory process", "summons for examination", "winding up".
Corporations Act

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.

Continue reading High Court Bulletin

Details

AGLC: High Court Bulletin [2022] HCAB 1
Case: [2022] HCAB 1
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of Australia heard and decided several cases in February 2022. In Walton & Anor v ACN 004 410 833 Ltd, the Court held that the appellants' purpose for seeking a summons for examination under s 596A of the Corporations Act 2001 was not foreign to the purpose of the statutory process, and that the examination was not an abuse of process. In Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Personnel Contracting Pty Ltd, the Court held that the second appellant was an employee of the respondent, not an independent contractor. In ZG Operations Australia Pty Ltd v Jamsek, the Court held that the respondents were employees of the company, not independent contractors. These cases involved questions of the nature of the employment relationship and the application of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The High Court also heard several cases reserved for judgment, including cases involving aviation law, constitutional law, and industrial law. The Court granted special leave to appeal in cases involving administrative law, criminal law, defamation, family law, and representative proceedings.

The Court also issued orders in cases that were not proceeding or were vacated, and refused special leave to appeal in several other cases. The Court's decisions in these cases will provide guidance on a range of legal issues, including the interpretation of statutes, the application of common law principles, and the scope of judicial review.

Orders