Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Cases reported in the NSWLR are selected by the Editor on the basis of their significance in relation to the interpretation, development or application of the law in New South Wales. Of the thousands of judgments delivered each year by the Supreme Court of New South Wales (including the Court of Appeal and Court of Criminal Appeal) only a ...
Supreme Court (ACT) ACT Law Reports: ACTLR: 2008-Thomson Reuters: Authorised report. Australian Capital Territory Reports: ACTR: 1973-Lexis Nexis: Neutral citation: ACTSC: 1986-AustLII. BarNet JADE. Supreme Court (NSW) NSW Law Reports: NSWLR: 1970-New South Wales Law Reports: Authorised report. Includes NSW Court of Appeal and NSW Court of ...
Attorney-General (NSW) v Brewery Employees Union of NSW, [1] commonly known as the Union Label case, was a landmark decision by the High Court of Australia on 8 August 1908. The case was significant in relation to the endorsement by the majority of the court of the reserved powers doctrine and as the first case to consider the scope of the ...
Airlines of New South Wales Pty Ltd v New South Wales (No 2), [1] was a High Court of Australia case about the validity of Commonwealth regulations about intrastate air navigation. Although the Commonwealth has the power to regulate interstate air navigation under s 51(i) of the Constitution, it can only regulate intrastate air navigation under ...
Federated Amalgamated Government Railway & Tramway Service Association v NSW Rail Traffic Employees Association, known as the Railway Servants Case, [1] is an early High Court of Australia case that held that employees of State railways could not be part of an interstate industrial dispute under the conciliation and arbitration power, [2] applying the doctrine of "implied inter-governmental ...
The Supreme Court of NSW in Mainteck Services Pty Ltd v Stein Heurtey SA, [19] supported the conclusion that Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society, [4] had been accepted in Australian law, therefore, ambiguity did not have to be pointed to before referring to 'surrounding circumstances'.
The High Court's decision was handed down on 10 August 2022, [1] with its reasons published the same day. [6] In the judgment summary, the Court stated that they held: [1] that ss 11 and 12 of the SD Act did not impermissibly burden the implied freedom in their application to, respectively, the communication or publication by a person of a record or report, or the possession by a person of a ...
In 2018, the Court heard 407 new cases, which included 265 appeals against severity of sentence, 108 appeals against conviction, 19 appeals against interlocutory judgments and 1 case returned from the High Court for re-hearing.