Cases and authorities

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Disclosure – Disputed claims of legal advice privilege and litigation privilege under ss 118 and 119 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) in relation to communications between defendant’s General Counsel and other officers and employees of the defendant – No question of principle.

PROCEDURE — stay pending appeal — dispute as to composition of board of listed company — whether applicant had established proper basis for stay — appeal to be heard in 12 business days — applicant profferred undertaking to be personally liable for quantifiable costs — applicant provided security for liability on undertaking — stay ordered

CRIME – application for request to sheriff for investigation of potential juror impropriety pursuant to s 73A of Jury Act 1977 (NSW) – application dismissed by judge – whether application could be renewed in appellate court on same basis – where judge who presided over trial had already investigated the matter – where previous investigation took place 18 months ago in immediate aftermath of incident – where previous investigation obtained evidence on oath – prospects of second investigation resulting in different evidence speculative – application refused JURISDICTION – nature of decision by Supreme Court judge to refuse application for request for sheriff to conduct investigation – nature of purported appeal from refusal of such application – availability of appeal under s 5F or s 22 of Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) – whether right of appeal under s 101 of Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) excluded by s 17 – whether decision judicial or administrative – whether decision amenable to judicial review

CHILD WELFARE — Parens patriae — Application for secure accommodation orders — Secure accommodation orders made in November 2022 for neurologically affected child exhibiting self-harming behaviours and at significant risk of sexual abuse — Progression of child through a protective care and transformative program designed to restore the child to life in the community having had the benefit of appropriate health and educative supports — Transition leave sought and ordered CHILD WELFARE — Parens patriae — Secure accommodation orders — Protective care and transformative program explained — Care supports and their aims described CHILD WELFARE — Parens patriae — Secure accommodation orders — Transition considerations explained — Leave to transition necessarily to be assessed by reference to viable placement alternatives — Proposed placement remote from child’s former carers — No closer acceptable alternative placement readily available — Balancing of risks associated with move to proposed distant placement against risks associated with delaying transition — Diminishing returns to be gained by keeping child within the existing program and facility — Further confinement with potentially unduly prolonged delay might be counter-productive — On balance, transition is appropriate — Nature of the protective jurisdiction enables the Court to stand ready to meet exigencies of setbacks if risks materialise

CIVIL PROCEDURE – Application to strike out defence for lack of progress – UCPR 12.7(2) – no point of principle CIVIL PROCEDURE – Application to dismiss cross claim for lack of progress – UCPR 12.7(1) – no point of principle

LAND LAW — Community title — Community scheme — Where resuming authority seeks orders restructuring a community scheme —Whether unit entitlements should be adjusted — No question of principle

BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION — RSL club engages builder, who engages subcontractor — subcontractor serves notices of claim on RSL club under Contractors Debts Act 1997 (NSW) — RSL club challenges adjudication determination in favour of builder — RSL club undertakes to maintain funds in bank account to pay notices of claim and pays the balance of the adjudicated amount into Court — RSL club fails — subcontractor still unpaid — whether monies in Court should be paid to the subcontractor, the builder or the RSL club. CONTRACTORS DEBTS ACT 1997 — purpose – review — whether RSL club entitled to defend enforcement action by subcontractor outside the ’pay now, argue later’ regime established by Building and Construction Industry Security of Payments Act 1999 – harmonious operation of both Acts.

LIQUIDATION – Whether company in liquidation owns motor vehicle.

HIGH RISK OFFENDERS – extended supervision orders (ESO) – final hearing – assessment of unacceptable risk of committing a serious offence – where the criminal history and index offending of the defendant involved serious violent offending – Paranoid Schizophrenia – continued lack of insight into own risk factors – 18-month ESO imposed – where the continued involvement of the ESO remains essential – where a CTO alone does not sufficiently manage the unacceptable risk – electronic monitoring “sunrise clause” condition not imposed

MENTAL HEALTH – Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW) – application for interim extension order – forensic patient – whether unacceptable risk of causing serious harm if status as forensic patient ceases – where defendant continues to deny he suffers from mental health issues and was non-complaint with pharmacological treatment – where defendant has a history of violence – risk posed cannot be managed by less restrictive means – interim extension order granted

NEGLIGENCE – duty of care – particular relationships – medical practitioner and patient – proceedings for damages as a result of a procedure carried out on the plaintiff’s left eye by a doctor at the Sydney Eye Hospital – where the plaintiff claims to have lost vision in his left eye and suffered ongoing pain and psychiatric damage – whether the defendant breached its duty of care by performing an excessive number of attempts to tap vitreous fluid causing injury – where the plaintiff’s evidence was found to be unreliable – where the defendant’s evidence was borne out by contemporaneous notes and accepted – where it was accepted that no more than three injections were attempted – where the procedure was carried out to a standard widely accepted in Australia by peer professional opinion as competent professional practice – defendant did not breach its duty of care OCCUPATIONS – medical practitioners – medical records – whether the defendant breached its duty of care by failing to document the procedure – where a number of notes about the procedure were absent – where it was uncertain if the notes were not made or lost subsequently – where the plaintiff claimed that the loss of notes contributed to his PTSD – where there is no requirement on a doctor to make notes – where there can be no breach of duty in omitting to make notes – where the failure to make out a s 5O defence does not impose a liability – defendant did not breach its duty of care EVIDENCE – expert evidence – whether the evidence of the plaintiff’s overseas treating doctor can be used as expert evidence – where the doctor prepared five reports – where the Expert Witness Code was not acknowledged – where a treating doctor lacks the objectivity of other experts – where the doctor has never practised in Australia – where the reports were obtained without letters of instruction – where the doctor reversed his opinion on a significant matter – where the evidence of the plaintiff’s expert was rejected unless there was unanimity with the other experts

CONSUMER LAW — Application of the Australian Consumer Law — whether primary judge was required to, but did not, make a finding as to whether the representations made were “false or misleading” and fell within the ambit of s 29(1)(b) of the Australian Consumer Law and s 12DB(1)(a) of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth)

CIVIL PROCEDURE — summary disposal — want of due despatch — delays by self-represented appellant in prosecuting an appeal — new circumstances come to light — not in the interests of justice to dismiss proceedings CIVIL PROCEDURE — Court of Appeal — objections to competency of appeal — uncertain whether leave to appeal required — appellant has attempted to comply with orders to file a summons seeking leave to appeal — appellant’s notice of appeal filed two days out of time — not in the interests of justice to dismiss proceedings CIVIL PROCEDURE — summary disposal — dismissal of proceedings — non-appearance of plaintiff — plaintiff withdrew legal representation mid-way through hearing and later left the courtroom— whether r 29.7 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules (2005) (NSW) applies where a party leaves the court room mid-way through a hearing CIVIL PROCEDURE — Court of Appeal — pro bono referral — party terminated previous pro bono referral — issue of principle emerged on appeal satisfying the “special reasons” requirement in r 7.36 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules (2005) (NSW)

EVIDENCE – Course of evidence – Evidence before trial – Admissibility of evidence – Affidavit evidence – Assessment of relevance of evidence to criminal proceedings – Whether probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the defendant under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 EVIDENCE – Admissions – Criminal proceedings – Admissibility of a guilty plea where plea subsequently withdrawn – Admissibility of an affidavit written by the defendant prior to the withdrawal of a guilty plea – Discretion to exclude evidence of an admission under section 90 of the Evidence Act 1995

COSTS — Party/Party — General rule that costs follow the event — Application of the rule and discretion — No issue of principle

CONTRACT – construction and interpretation of Prospective Approval Indication contract – regard to text, context and purpose – importance of grammatical structure – reading contract as a whole – no question of principle EQUITY – relief against penalties – whether contract clause unenforceable as a penalty – no question of principle

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – judicial review – decision of Racing Appeals Tribunal – where horse tested positive to prohibited substances after a race – appeal by way of fresh hearing – where expert evidence given little weight – where expert was not cross-examined – where plaintiff contended that they were unaware that the Tribunal was contemplating certain adverse findings – whether plaintiff was denied procedural fairness – no denial of procedural fairness ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – judicial review – failure to give reasons – where expert evidence given little weight – where plaintiff contended that the Tribunal did not give sufficient reasons – adequate reasons provided

CIVIL PROCEDURE – appeal – application for leave to appeal – respondent’s application for security for costs – whether corporate applicant unable to pay costs if unsuccessful – strength of applicant’s case for leave – stay until security paid into court CIVIL PROCEDURE – appeal – application to stay costs order made by primary judge – stay on basis of payment into court CIVIL PROCEDURE – application for leave to appeal – respondent’s application for security for costs – applicant issued notice to produce – respondent’s motion to set aside notice – documents sought to resist security for costs application – agreements between respondent and legal representatives – relevance not established – documents sought to show respondent owed money to applicant – relevance not established – to determine balance of account between parties would be to engage in satellite litigation

NEGLIGENCE – historical sexual assault – whether error in process of making findings of primary fact – whether removal of limitation period alters obligation of plaintiff to establish elements of cause of action – whether primary judge sufficiently paid regard to inconsistencies in plaintiff’s account NEGLIGENCE – claim brought against “Diocese” – juristic nature of defendant – significance of defendant being proper defendant under Part 1B of Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) – whether defendant owed duty of care to plaintiff in 1969 – significance of litigation proceeding on basis that alleged abuser was a parish priest rather than an assistant priest – obligation to establish foreseeability of harm by assistant priest by evidence – no duty of care owed NEGLIGENCE – non-delegable duties – whether appellant could owe non-delegable duty of care for intentional criminal act of assistant priest

COSTS – Whether to make a gross sum costs order.

CORPORATIONS – voluntary administration – where First Plaintiff is largest shareholder of the First Defendant, which is in administration – where First Plaintiff executed letter of comfort as a deed – where First Plaintiff subsequently provided an executed term sheet, setting out the terms of a proposed bridge funding facility – where the term sheet provides that it is a condition precedent of the facility that financing documentation be entered – where the letter of comfort has been extended to 30 June 2025 or until facility documentation is entered - whether proposed financier has capacity to meet all claims of creditors that are due and payable – whether conditions precedent of facility will be satisfied or waived – whether First Defendant is solvent – whether order should be made ending administration of First Defendant with immediate effect

CIVIL PROCEDURE – effect of grant of “liberty to apply” – whether costs order conditional or final – time limit imposed by r 36.16 of the UCPR – inherent jurisdiction to make orders to prevent injustice or ensure fairness – general power under s 14 of the Civil Procedure Act to dispense with rules – no power for Court to extend the time for the filing of a motion to vary a costs order

CIVIL PROCEDURE – hearings – application to expedite application for leave to appeal where final hearing below soon to commence – prolonged proceeding below with final hearing dates twice postponed on applicant’s application based on mental health arguments – applicant not yet filed materials on application for leave to appeal despite orders – application refused to avoid heavy burden on parties and interference in preparation for final hearing CIVIL PROCEDURE – Court of Appeal – whether should be concurrent hearing of leave application and appeal is administrative decision generally made by President of Court of Appeal – not open to applicant to seek that the decision be made by a judge of appeal determining a motion CIVIL PROCEDURE – hearings – adjournment – adjournment sought when very short period remains before commencement of final hearing

PROCEDURE – judicial review of District Court’s dismissal of interlocutory appeal from Children’s Court – whether independent legal representative of child entitled to be heard – where divergence in submissions between Secretary and independent legal representative – where divergence of principle on face of authorities – where Court would be assisted by submissions from independent legal representative on questions of law – leave granted to be joined as intervener

CONTRACTS — construction and interpretation — letter of comfort — where parent company undertook to pay “any debts” of subsidiary — where liquidators of subsidiary admitted proofs of debt in respect of undetermined civil claims — whether “any debts” in the letter of comfort includes liabilities accepted by liquidators

COURTS AND TRIBUNALS – Mental Health Review Tribunal – whether Tribunal’s detention and revocation of conditional release were valid under ss 79 and 81 of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW) MENTAL HEALTH – forensic patient – forensic patient scheduled under s 19 of the Mental Health Act 2007 (NSW) – whether extension of time and leave to appeal should be granted – where conditional release breached – whether s 109 of Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW) provides a mandatory scheme where conditional release breached STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – whether s 81 limited to detention orders – whether s 81 provides a general power to make orders as to detention of forensic patients – where orders being made after initial detention order – whether power to revoke conditional release implied from express power of detention in s 81 – Anthony Hordern principle of statutory construction considered – futility of order for apprehension under s 109 when forensic patient already detained – whether s 109 has a role to play

CONTRACTS – Formation – Agreement – Whether an oral agreement of accord and satisfaction was formed – Lack of a genuine dispute between the parties CONTRACTS – Formation – Consideration – Where part payment of a debt is not good consideration EQUITY – Equitable interests in property – Priority disputes between competing equitable interests –Whether there was actual or constructive notice of the earlier equity – Whether there was a “registrable dealing” for the purposes of section 43A of the Real Property Act 1900 (NSW)

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – suppression and non-publication orders – where the Court published reasons in September 2023 dismissing an appeal from an interlocutory judgment in the District Court – where the Court declined to grant a permanent stay of criminal proceedings – where publication of the Court’s reasons was restricted until completion of the District Court trial – where the District Court trial was completed – where suppression orders were made by the District Court in respect of the identities of a solicitor and solicitor advocate in related proceedings – where the respondent sought amendments to the Court’s reasons in order to redact the initials of the instructing solicitor and solicitor advocate prior to publication – whether suppression orders should be made according to s 8 of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW)

DEEDS – Execution and attestation – Intention to create deed – Delivery in escrow – Intention by parties delivering deed to be immediately bound on condition that deed becomes effective only upon execution by other party – Held: Deed effective immediately upon satisfaction of escrow condition. EQUITY – Unconscionable conduct – Whether defendants’ execution of deed procured by plaintiff taking unconscientious advantage of alleged special disadvantage of first defendant – Held: No. Special disadvantage not established. CONTRACTS – Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW) – Whether deed unjust – Held: No. EQUITY – Equitable remedies – Specific performance – Where the plaintiff has carried out her obligations under the deed – Where defendants are in default under the deed – Held: Specific performance of the deed ordered. ESTOPPEL – Proprietary estoppel – Where plaintiff became sole registered proprietor of family home by right of survivorship upon death of her husband – Where first defendant is the son of the plaintiff and the deceased – Where first defendant seeks a declaration that he has an equitable interest in the family home and that 50 per cent of that property is held on trust for him by the plaintiff – Where first defendant claims the deceased made representations to him, to the knowledge of the plaintiff, that he would inherit the family home – Whether representations were in fact made – Whether first defendant acted in reliance on the alleged representations – Where the first defendant has acknowledged by deed that he has no equitable interest in the property and has released the plaintiff from any claims against the property – Held: The deed is a complete defence to the proprietary estoppel claim, and the alleged promises were not provided in any event. SUCCESSION – Family provision – Approval of release – Where first defendant has released his rights to apply for an order for family provision out of the whole or any part of the plaintiff’s actual or notional estate – Consideration of matters in Succession Act 2006 (NSW) s 95(4) and circumstances of the case – Held: Release approved under s 95 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW).

CIVIL PROCEDURE – Summary judgment – whether Defendant cannot succeed - application for summary judgment dismissed.

CIVIL PROCEDURE – consent judgment – compensation for breach of duty of care and professional negligence resulting in ataxia cerebral palsy – where defendant purchased the hospital assets but not the liabilities – further investigations into identity of insurer – satisfied the agreement in the interests of plaintiff – judgment entered

COSTS – whether departure from usual costs order is warranted – where defendant is not an ordinary litigant – where it is claimed that defendant did not disclose reason for decision until the hearing – whether misconduct warranting an order that each party bear its own costs occurred– not satisfied that any departure from usual costs order is warranted given the plaintiff’s pursuit of a construction of the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017 (NSW) which could not be accepted

BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION — adjudication — Building and Construction Industry (Security of Payment) Act 2021 (WA) — policy of security of payment legislation — timeframes — rough and ready — brutally fast — policy best served by restricting judicial intervention — East Coast model — jurisdictional differences and similarities BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION — adjudication — Building and Construction Industry (Security of Payment) Act 2021 (WA) — jurisdictional fact — where statutory language objectively worded — subjective opinion of adjudicator — release of performance security bonds BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION — adjudication — Building and Construction Industry (Security of Payment) Act 2021 (WA) — whether service requirement met by providing link within email — meaning of “given” — whether strict compliance was a precondition to jurisdiction BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION — adjudication — Building and Construction Industry (Security of Payment) Act 2021 (WA) — proper form of relief — mandamus — whether adjudicator must determine review application in accordance with law — where other proceedings on foot

BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION — Adjudication — Judicial review — Whether adjudicator’s determination affected by jurisdictional error on the basis that he erroneously found that certain submissions were not “duly made” or failed to consider submissions about set-off — Whether orders ought to be made in the nature of mandamus compelling adjudicator to determine parts of adjudication application which remain undetermined because of jurisdictional error BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION — Adjudication — Declaration — Whether declaration about validity of new adjudication application ought to be made

APPEALS — Contracts — Construction — where two co-owners agreements (COA) govern relationship between co-owners of large suburban shopping centre — where pre-emption rights on defaults and deemed defaults by co-owners in dealing with that co-owner’s ownership interest entitle non-defaulting owners to purchase defaulting co-owner’s ownership interest — whether two separate transactions effecting a transfer of ownership interests were prohibited disposals triggering pre-emption rights — whether second COA had a greater effect than to substitute an outgoing co-owner with an incoming co-owner — whether ownership interest was acquired “under” clauses regulating dealing and establishing pre-emption rights — whether service provisions ought be construed as essential

COSTS – review of decision of Judge of Appeal under s 46(4) of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) – where security for costs granted by Judge of Appeal – whether decision involved an error of principle or was plainly wrong – where Judge of Appeal found special circumstances were not required under s 1335 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – no error of principle

CRIMINAL LAW – appeals – appeal against sentence – whether error in not applying statutory numerical discount for guilty plea entered after trial commenced – error conceded – question of whether any lesser sentence warranted in law– question of whether applicant’s moral culpability should be reduced – approach to Bugmy considerations – approach on resentence – serious offending over many years – multiple child victims – leave granted – appeal against sentence dismissed

CRIME – Appeals – Appeal against sentence – Application for leave to appeal – The relationship between the guideline judgment of R v Ponfield and s 21A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act – An offender’s prior criminal history and being subject to conditional liberty at the time of offending not to be taken into account in assessing the objective seriousness of the offence for sentence

Plaintiff M19A/2024 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs High Court – Appellate jurisdiction – Practice – Reasons for judgment – Where first appellant sent Notice of Intention to Consider Cancellation ("NOICC") of visa – Where first appellant did not respond to NOICC – Where first appellant did not have legal obligation to respond to NOICC – Where delegate of respondent gave weight to first appellant not responding to NOICC – Where appellants sought to raise in amended notice of appeal for first time contention that delegate of respondent committed jurisdictional error by giving weight to first appellant's non-response to NOICC – Where respondent conceded that jurisdictional error before hearing of appeal – Where parties provided to Court agreed document explaining circumstances – Whether reasons for decision required when orders sought by consent – Whether appropriate to make orders by consent – Whether decision of delegate affected by jurisdictional error. Words and phrases – "appellate jurisdiction", "concession", "consent orders", "institutional responsibility", "jurisdictional error", "legal obligation", "original jurisdiction", "reasons". Constitution, ss 73, 75. Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 37. Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 116, 119, 140.

CORPORATIONS – Arrangements and reconstructions – Schemes of arrangement or compromise – Application under s 411 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) for orders approving shareholders’ scheme of arrangement and creditors’ scheme of arrangement – Where formal requirements satisfied – Whether schemes of arrangement should be approved

COSTS – Variation of costs orders – Offer of Compromise – Plaintiffs unsuccessful on issues which are severable

CIVIL LAW – appeal from decision of NCAT – building dispute – where builder fails to pay award – where plaintiff seeks security for costs – where builder seeks stay of NCAT orders – both motions granted but stay conditional on payment of security for costs

ASSOCIATIONS AND CLUBS — Particular bodies — Political organisations — Preselection disputes CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — Commonwealth Constitution — Elections — Eligibility for election 7

COSTS – application for costs on an indemnity basis – whether indemnity costs should be ordered.

SUCCESSION — Family provision — Claim by de facto spouse pursuant to s 59, Succession Act 2006 (NSW) — Whether will made adequate provision for the proper maintenance, education or advancement in life of the plaintiff — Where plaintiff given portable life estate in home shared with deceased — Where plaintiff sought in lieu absolute ownership of other real property in the estate — Where provision inadequate SUCCESSION — Family provision — Matters in s 60(2) — Other beneficiaries’ competing claims on the estate — Relevance of historical abuse to the nature and extent of obligations owed by the deceased person to beneficiaries — Weight to be given to testator’s judgment SUCCESSION — Family provision — Whether to exercise power in s 66(2) to make additional orders to adjust the interests of other beneficiaries — Where question not sufficiently addressed in parties’ submissions

COSTS – adjustment to costs orders – specified gross sum cost order – Civil Procedure Act 2005 s 98(4)(c) – what adjustments should be made to existing costs orders in the proceedings by reason of a decision of the Court of Appeal overturning part of the Court’s prior judgments at first instance. CIVIL PROCEDURE – interest – whether in calculating offsetting claims in costs, whether interest should run on a Local Court judgment the subject of a temporary stay on enforcement when no order made it interest should not run under Civil Procedure Act 2005 s 101(4).

Statutes – Construction – Where s 27QE of Limitation of Actions Act 1958 (Vic) provides court can set aside settlement agreement for personal injury resulting from child abuse if satisfied "just and reasonable" to do so – Where appellant entered into settlement agreements for personal injury allegedly resulting from child abuse – Where settlement agreements renounced claim for economic loss – Where reasons for settlement included Ellis defence and limitation period – Whether s 27QE requires Ellis defence or limitation period to have materially influenced decision to settle in order to be "just and reasonable" to set aside settlement agreement – Whether evidence allowed court to be satisfied "just and reasonable" to set aside renouncement of economic loss claim. Words and phrases – "Centrelink benefits", "Centrelink repayment", "child abuse", "correctness standard", "decision to settle", "economic loss", "Ellis defence", "general damages", "just and reasonable", "legal barriers", "limitation defence", "limitation period", "material factors", "materially influenced", "non-economic loss", "personal injury", "personal injury resulting from child abuse", "positive finding", "prerequisites to the exercise of the power", "quasi-prerequisites to the exercise of the power", "set aside", "set aside a settlement agreement", "settlement agreement", "settlement deed". Limitation of Actions Act 1958 (Vic), ss 27QD, 27

Practice and procedure – Standing – Where appellant conducts forestry operations pursuant to integrated forestry operations approval ("IFOA") – Where respondent brought civil enforcement proceedings seeking injunctive and declaratory relief – Where primary judge found respondent lacked standing because no "special interest" in subject matter of proceedings – Where Court of Appeal of Supreme Court of New South Wales set aside primary judge's finding that respondent had no special interest – Where s 69ZA of Forestry Act 2012 (NSW) limited certain actions in respect of provisions of Act that give any person a right to institute proceedings to remedy or restrain a breach, whether or not any right of the person has been or may be infringed by or as a consequence of that breach – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding on proper construction of Pt 5B of Forestry Act and cognate provisions of Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (NSW) private persons or entities with special interest in subject matter of proceedings have standing to bring proceedings to enforce duties and obligations imposed by IFOA. Words and phrases – "any person", "auxiliary jurisdiction", "Class 4 jurisdiction", "clear and unmistakeable intention", "commence and maintain proceedings", "common law standing", "declaratory or injunctive relief", "duties and obligations", "equitable jurisdiction", "injunction", "integrated forestry operations approval", "liberty of access", "matter", "private rights affected or interfered with", "public rights, duties or obligations", "special interest", "standing", "subject matter", "third-parties". Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (NSW), ss 13.3, 13.14, 13.14A, 13.15. Forestry Act 2012 (NSW), Pt 5B. Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 20.

Constitutional law – Separation of powers – Judicial power – Principle established in Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [1996] HCA 24; (1996) 189 CLR 51 ("Kable") – Where plaintiff convicted of two counts of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment with a non-parole period of 20 years – Where body of one of murder victims never located – Where parole board of Queensland may make "no cooperation declaration" under s 175L of Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld) ("CS Act") about "no body-no parole prisoner" where remains of victim not found and where not satisfied prisoner has given "satisfactory cooperation" – Where effect of "no cooperation declaration" is that prisoner may not apply for parole notwithstanding expiration of non-parole period – Where president of parole board may make "restricted prisoner declaration" about "restricted prisoner" under s 175E of CS Act – Where effect of "restricted prisoner declaration" is that prisoner may not apply for parole other than "exceptional circumstances parole" – Where "no cooperation declaration" was made about plaintiff and "restricted prisoner declaration" may be made if "no cooperation declaration" invalid – Whether ss 175L and 175E of CS Act invalid as enabling Queensland executive to impermissibly interfere with exercise of judicial power by State courts contrary to principle in Kable. Words and phrases – "adjudgment of criminal guilt", "body or remains", "conditions for the grant of parole", "defining characteristics of a State Supreme Court", "eligibility for parole", "eligible person", "exceptional circumstances parole", "executive power", "judicial power", "minimum period of imprisonment", "no body-no parole prisoner", "no cooperation declaration", "non-parole period", "parole", "parole board", "power to grant parole", "prisoner", "public interest", "punishment", "punitive purpose", "restricted prisoner", "restricted prisoner declaration", "retribution", "satisfactory cooperation", "sentence imposed by the sentencing judge". Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld), ss 175B, 175C, 175D, 175E, 175F, 175G, 175H, 175I, 175K, 175L, 175N, 175O, 175P, 175Q, 175R, 175S, 175T, 175U, 176, 176A, 176B, 176C, 180, 193A, 193AA, 221, 222. Corrective Services (No Body, No Parole) Amendment Act 2017 (Qld). Police Powers and Responsibilities and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2021 (Qld). Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW), s 154A. Corrections Act 1986 (Vic), ss 74AA, 74AAA, 74

Immigration – Protection visas – Invalid application – Where appellant applied for protection visa and was refused by delegate of Minister – Where Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed delegate's decision – Where Assistant Minister exercised power under s 417(1) of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to substitute more "favourable" decision and granted appellant three-month visitor visa with no further stay condition – Where appellant made second application for protection visa – Where delegate found second application invalid under s 48A – Whether majority of Full Court of Federal Court of Australia erred in finding second application invalid and barred by s 48A – Whether act of refusal in s 48A is reference to historical fact of refusal, or reference to act of refusal which remains legally valid – Whether exercise of substitution power under s 417(1) had effect of setting aside original refusal decision. Words and phrases – "barred", "continuing legal effect", "continuing legal operation", "decision", "extinguished", "fast track reviewable decision", "finally determined", "grant", "historical fact", "legal effect", "migration zone", "more favourable", "non-citizen", "power to set aside", "power to substitute", "protection visa", "public interest", "refuse", "reviewable decision", "set aside", "substitute", "vary", "Visitor (Subclass 600) visa". Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 5, 48, 48A, 48B, 64U, 65, 119, 121, 137, 166BC, 166BE, 351, 411, 415, 417, 501A, 501J. Migration Legislation Amendment Act 1989 (Cth), s 26. Migration Reform Act 1992 (Cth), ss 23, 32. Migration Legislation Amendment Act 1994 (Cth), s 83. Migration Legislation Amendment Act (No 6) 1995 (Cth).