| McIntyre v Fish (VSC) - judicial
review - adequate reasons for opinion of medical panel - judicial review
refused |
| Commissioner of
Taxation v McGrouther (FCAFC) - taxation - taxpayers could withdraw
notices given to Commissioner - Commissioner’s appeal allowed |
| Sung v Malaxos (NSWSC) - succession
- family provision order in favour of de facto wife of deceased refused |
| Wong v Maroubra
Automotive Refinishers Pty Ltd; Ayres v Maroubra Automotive Refinishers Pty Ltd
(No 2) (NSWSC) - detinue - repairer not entitled to withhold possession of cars
until payment of towing and storage fees - damages |
| 122 Pitt Street Pty
Ltd ACN 104 825 961 v Universal 1919 Pty Ltd (NSWSC) - landlord and tenant - independent
valuer complied with lease - parties bound by valuation |
| Idameneo (No 123) Pty
Ltd v Suszko (SASC) - pleadings - dismissal of application to amend defence and plead
set-off and counterclaim - fresh evidence not admitted - recall of order
refused |
| Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read) |
McIntyre
v Fish
[2015] VSC 82
Supreme Court of Victoria
Zammit J
Judicial review - plaintiff sought
review of opinion of medical panel concerning injury suffered during course of
her employment - medical panel found plaintiff suffering from condition not
relevant to claimed injury and that plaintiff had no ability to return to
preinjury employment - plaintiff sought to quash opinion on basis of inadequate
reasons - ss65 & 68 Accident
Compensation Act 1985 (Vic) - held: reasons adequately demonstrated Panel’s
path of reasoning - Panel not required to embark on explanation of which
medical opinions it agreed or disagreed with - judicial review refused.
McIntyre
|
Commissioner
of Taxation v McGrouther
[2015] FCAFC 34
Full Court of the Federal Court of
Australia
Allsop CJ; Pagone & Davies JJ
Taxation - respondents gave Commissioner
notices requiring him to make objection decision - notices given two days after
Commissioner served first respondent with notice under s264 Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth) requiring
him to attend examination - respondents “withdrew” their notices before end of 60
day period referred to in s14ZYA(3) as condition of Commissioner agreeing to
adjourn examination of first respondent - despite withdrawal, respondents
commenced appeal under Pt IVC against the disallowance of objections after expiry
of 60 day period - Commissioner sought to strike out or dismiss appeal on basis
there was no objection decision - respondents contended that once election made
by taxpayer to give notice it could not be withdrawn by taxpayer and objections
were deemed to have been disallowed - primary judge found in favour of
respondents - statutory construction - quilibet
potest renunciare juri pro se introducto - whether rights given to taxpayer
under s14ZYA capable of waiver held: primary judge erred in finding notice
could not be withdrawn - leave to appeal granted - appeal allowed.
Commissioner
|
Sung
v Malaxos
[2015] NSWSC 186
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Pembroke J
Succession - family provision - claim by
plaintiff de facto wife of testator - deceased left Will dividing estate
between daughter and plaintiff - adequate and proper provision - freedom of
testamentary disposition - held: manner in which testator divided estate was
carefully considered and appropriate - totality of evidence supported
testator’s wisdom and justice of testator’s apportionment - to grant litany of plaintiff’s
requirements would flout reasonable, fair and rational scheme of testamentary
disposition and seriously disadvantage testator’s daughter and husband -
plaintiff’s claim not justified by statutory criteria in Ch 3 Succession Act 2006 (NSW) - claim
dismissed.
Sung
|
Wong
v Maroubra Automotive Refinishers Pty Ltd; Ayres v Maroubra Automotive
Refinishers Pty Ltd (No 2)
[2015] NSWSC 222
Supreme Court of New South Wales
McCallum J
Detinue - two separate proceedings
concerning a repairer’s entitlement to withhold possession of cars until
payment by owner or NRMA of towing and storage fees - each plaintiff was owner of a car insured by NRMA
- each car damaged in accident - in each
case tow truck driver nominated the premises of particular repairer as a
destination to which car could be towed - owners consented to course and did not request
repairer to make repairs - plaintiffs contended repairer wrongly refused to
deliver up possession of the cars upon demand and was liable in detinue - repairer sought payment of
disputed towing and storage fees from each plaintiff or NRMA - s53 Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) - s62 Tow Truck Industry Act 1998 (NSW) - held:
no contract of bailment for reward or work and labour came into existence - defendant’s
reliance on Motor Vehicle Insurance and Repair Industry Code of Conduct
misconceived - defence to claim in detinue failed - cross-claim dismissed -
amounts paid into Court released to plaintiff.
Wong
|
122
Pitt Street Pty Ltd ACN 104 825 961 v Universal 1919 Pty Ltd [2015] NSWSC 234
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Kunc J
Landlord and tenant - plaintiff lessor
leased part of building to defendant lessee - lease was term of 10 years with
option for further 10 years - lessee exercised option - lease provided for
market review of base rent upon exercise
of option to renew - lessor proposed new base rent - lessee engaged rent dispute mechanism under lease
resulting in appointment of independent valuer - valuer determined market rent
approximately $500,000 less than figure proposed by lessor - if valuer complied
with lease by disregarding value of fitout parties accepted they were bound by determination
- held: valuer complied with lease - valuation binding on parties - summons and
cross-summons dismissed
122Pitt
|
Idameneo
(No 123) Pty Ltd v Suszko
[2015] SASC 39
Supreme Court of South Australia
Stanley J
Pleadings - defendant sought recall of
order dismissing application to amend defence and to plead set-off and
counterclaim in reliance on “fresh” evidence - Court’s power to recall order
previously made - test for reception of
fresh evidence - held: Court did not consider evidence would probably have
had important influence on outcome of application - fresh evidence not admitted
- application to recall order refused.
Idameneo
|
