Legal Research
Cases
High Court Bulletin

High Court Bulletin

Link copied

Case Copied 22 November 2019 33 min read

Contents

On this page

High Court Bulletin

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

[2019] HCAB 9 (22 November 2019)

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
Vella & Ors v Commissioner of Police (NSW) & Anor	Constitutional Law
Fennell v The Queen	Criminal Law
HT v The Queen & Anor	Criminal Practice
Lordianto & Anor v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police; Kalimuthu & Anor v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police	Criminal Practice

3: Cases Reserved

Case	Title
Smethurst & Anor v Commissioner of Police & Anor	Constitutional Law
The Queen v Guode	Criminal Law
BHP Billiton Limited (now named BHP Group Limited) v Commissioner of Taxation	Taxation
Commissioner of State Revenue v Rojoda Pty Ltd	Taxation

4: Original Jurisdiction

5: Section 40 Removal

6: Special Leave Granted

Case	Title
Northern Land Council & Anor v Quall & Anor	Administrative Law
Pell v The Queen (referred to Full Court for argument as on an appeal)	Criminal Law
Calidad Pty Ltd & Ors v Seiko Epson Corporation & Anor	Intellectual Property
State of Queensland v The Estate of the Late Jennifer Leanne Masson	Tort Law

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 November 2019 sittings.

Constitutional Law

Vella & Ors v Commissioner of Police (NSW) & Anor

S30/2019: [2019] HCA 38

Judgment delivered: 6 November 2019

Coram: Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ

Catchwords:

Constitutional law (Cth) – Judicial power – Constitution – Ch III – State Parliament – Institutional integrity of State courts – Where s 5(1) of Crimes (Serious Crime Prevention Orders) Act 2016 (NSW) provides that State court may make order if satisfied that specified person has been convicted of serious criminal offence or involved in serious crime related activity and satisfied that reasonable grounds to believe that making of order would protect public by preventing, restricting or disrupting involvement by that person in serious crime related activities – Where s 6(1) of Act provides that order against that specified person may contain such prohibitions, restrictions, requirements and other provisions as court considers appropriate for purpose of protecting public by preventing, restricting or disrupting involvement by that person in serious crime related activities – Where proceedings under Act are civil proceedings – Whether making order exercise of judicial power – Whether powers conferred by Act incompatible with State court's role as repository of federal judicial power – Whether powers conferred by Act substantially impair institutional integrity of State court.
Words…

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: [2019] HCAB 9
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of Australia handed down several judgments during the November 2019 sittings. In Vella & Ors v Commissioner of Police (NSW) & Anor, the Court considered whether provisions of the Crimes (Serious Crime Prevention Orders) Act 2016 (NSW) were incompatible with the role of the NSW Supreme Court as a repository of federal judicial power. In Fennell v The Queen, the Court allowed an appeal against conviction on the basis that the circumstantial evidence was weak and an identification of the murder weapon was based on highly improbable evidence. In HT v The Queen & Anor, the Court allowed an appeal against sentence on the basis that the appellant had been denied procedural fairness. In Lordianto & Anor v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police; Kalimuthu & Anor v Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police, the Court dismissed an appeal against the forfeiture of tainted property under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth). The Court found that the property had not ceased to be tainted.

Orders