R v Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd formerly known as Sinclair Knight Merz - [2022] HCATrans 193

[2022] HCATrans 193

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
Sydney No S111 of 2022

B e t w e e n -
THE KING
Applicant
and
JACOBS GROUP (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD FORMERLY KNOWN AS SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
Respondent
Application for special leave to appeal

GORDON J
JAGOT J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 10 NOVEMBER 2022, AT 9.16 AM

GORDON J: Pursuant to rule 41.08.1, Justice Jagot and I order that special leave to appeal is granted. The parties will be contacted about estimates of time for the hearing of the matter and will also be made aware of the directions necessary for undertaking the appeal.

AT 9.17 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED

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 R v Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd formerly known as Sincl...

Details

AGLC: R v Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd formerly known as Sinclair Knight Merz [2022] HCATrans 193
Case: [2022] HCATrans 193
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd, formerly known as Sinclair Knight Merz, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia. The specific nature of the dispute that led to this application is not detailed in the provided transcript. The decision on special leave was made by Justices Jagot and Gordon.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether to grant special leave to appeal. This involves determining if the case raises a question of law that is of general public importance, or if there is a need for the High Court to clarify or develop the law, or if the interests of the administration of justice require it.

Justices Jagot and Gordon granted special leave to appeal. Their reasoning for this decision is not elaborated upon in the transcript, but the granting of special leave indicates that the Court considered the application to meet the threshold for further consideration of the appeal. The parties will be contacted regarding the scheduling and directions for the hearing of the substantive appeal.

Orders