Legal Research
Cases
High Court Bulletin

High Court Bulletin

Link copied

Case Copied 19 September 2014 25 min read

Contents

On this page

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

[2014] HCAB 07 (19 September 2014)
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

Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker

Contract Law

Maxwell v Highway Hauliers Pty Ltd

Insurance

Plaintiff S4-2014 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

Migration

2: Cases Reserved

Case

Title

Kuczborski v The State of Queensland

Constitutional Law

Wellington Capital Limited v Australia Securities & Investments Commission & Anor

Corporations Law

Rhiannon Gray by her tutor Kathleen Anne Gray v Richards

Damages

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v BHP Coal Pty Ltd

Industrial Law

3: Original Jurisdiction

Case

Title

Queensland Nickel Pty Limited v Commonwealth of Australia

Constitutional Law

4: Special Leave Granted

Case

Title

CMB v Attorney General for New South Wales

Criminal Law

Lavin and Anor v Toppi and Ors

Equity

The State of Queensland v Tom Congoo, Layne Malthouse and John Watson on behalf of the Bar-Barrum people #4

Native Title

Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police v Zhao and Anor

Proceeds of Crime

1: Cases Handed Down
The following cases were handed down by the High Court of Australia during the September 2014 sittings.
Contract Law
Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker
A1/2014: [2014] HCA 32.
Judgment: 10 September 2014.
Coram: French CJ, Kiefel, Bell, Gageler and Keane JJ.
Catchwords:
Contract – Employment contract – Implied terms – Employee’s position made redundant – Employer’s conduct denied employee opportunity of redeployment – Whether term of mutual trust and confidence should be implied by law in employment contracts.
Words and phrases – “duty of cooperation”, “employment contract”, “employment relationship”, “necessity”, “relational contract”, “term of mutual trust and confidence”, “terms implied by law”, “terms implied in fact”.

Appealed from FCA (FC): [2013] FCAFC 83.
Held: Appeal allowed.
Return to Top
Insurance
Maxwell v Highway Hauliers Pty Ltd
P12/2014: [2014] HCA 33.
Judgment: 10 September 2014.
Coram: Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell and Gageler JJ.
Catchwords:
Insurance – Statutory construction – Where contract of insurance covered accidental damage to vehicles – Where contract of insurance required drivers to obtain satisfactory driver test score – Where drivers of vehicles involved in accidents had not completed driver tests – Where failure to complete driver test did not cause or contribute to accidents – Whether s 54(1) of Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) requires insurer to indemnify insured for loss caused by accidents.
Words and phrases – “act”, “claim”, “contract of insurance”, “indemnity”, “scope of cover”.

Appealed from WASC (CA): [2013] WASCA 115.
Held: Appeal dismissed.
Return to Top
Migration
Plaintiff S4-2014 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection…

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: [2014] HCAB 7
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker was heard by the High Court of Australia. The central issue was whether a term of mutual trust and confidence should be implied by law in employment contracts. The court was required to consider whether such a term existed and if it should be implied in light of the employer's conduct denying the employee the opportunity of redeployment. The court found that a term of mutual trust and confidence could be implied in certain circumstances, but it was not necessary to imply such a term in this case. The appeal was allowed, and the decision of the Federal Court of Australia was reversed. The court held that the employer's conduct did not warrant the implication of a term of mutual trust and confidence, as the employee's position had been made redundant and there were no reasonable opportunities for redeployment.

Orders