General & Other
General & Other judgments from Australian courts and tribunals, with a plain-English summary, the legal holding and frequently asked questions.
Supreme Court Orders Sale of Jointly Owned Shares and Eviction
The Supreme Court of New South Wales ordered the sale of jointly owned shares and required the defendant to vacate the premises within 42 days. The decision was made under section 36A of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW).
Costs Follow Separate Legal Issue in Dust Diseases Tribunal Case
Supreme Court Rejects Stay Application in Fatal Boating Collision Case
The Supreme Court of New South Wales rejected an application to move a case involving a fatal boating collision in Fiji to be heard in Fiji instead. The court ruled that New South Wales was an appropriate forum for the case.
Claimant Wins Mortgage Challenge Using Estoppel
Stay Granted Pending Appeal Outcome
The Court of Appeal granted a stay of orders entered against the claimant pending the outcome of an appeal. The claimant argued that without a stay, the appeal would become abortive due to potential bankruptcy proceedings.
Supreme Court Grants Leave for Shareholders to Bring Derivative Proceedings
The Supreme Court of NSW granted permission for shareholders to bring derivative proceedings against a company. The shareholders argued that the company's director had breached their duties, leading to improper financial transactions. The Court found that the shareholders had demonstrated serious questions to be tried, thus granting them leave to proceed.
Appeal Dismissed Due to Reasonable Argument on Time Limits
The appeal was dismissed because there was a reasonable argument that the appeal was not filed out of time. The court took into account an outstanding application for extending the time limit under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).
Federal Court Orders Each Party to Bear Own Costs for Interlocutory Application
In this Federal Court case, the judge decided that each party must pay their own legal fees after considering the outcome of an earlier interlocutory application. The decision reflects a balance between the success and failure of claims made by both sides.
Supreme Court Rules No Event of Default in Negative Pledge Breach
In a commercial contract dispute, the Supreme Court of NSW ruled that a breach of a negative pledge clause did not constitute an event of default. The court found that the breach did not have a significant adverse effect on the financial obligations.
District Court Grants Leave for Late Personal Injury Claim
The District Court allowed a plaintiff to start a late personal injury claim after determining that the plaintiff had provided a full and satisfactory explanation for the delay in starting the claim.
NSW Supreme Court Orders Genetic Testing in Medical Malpractice Case
Supreme Court Grants Judgment on Separate Issues Related to Loans and Guarantees
The Supreme Court of NSW granted judgment in favour of the plaintiff on separate issues related to loans and guarantees. The defendant failed to establish a defence to the claim for repayment and could not set off alleged harm to the company against the debt.
Company Wound Up Due to Breakdown of Relationships
Claim of Professional Negligence Against Solicitors Dismissed
Supreme Court Awards Costs to Plaintiff After Statutory Demand Set Aside
Defendant Allowed to Amend Defence and File Cross-Claim in NSW Supreme Court Case
In this case, the court allowed the defendant to change their defence and file a new claim against the plaintiff. The defendant claimed that the loan agreement and mortgage were a sham, and the court agreed that this was a reasonable argument.
Federal Court Grants Site-Blocking Orders for Copyright Infringement
In this case, a company that owns film copyrights asked the Federal Court for an order to block websites that allow people to illegally stream their movies. The court agreed and ordered internet service providers to disable access to those sites.
Federal Court Rules Against an Internet Provider Over Misleading Billing Service
An internet a person's Premium Direct Billing Service led to customers being charged for digital content they did not know about or agree to purchase. This violated consumer protection laws and resulted in a fine of $10 million from the a person.