|Howes v Comcare (FCA) - administrative law - affirmation of Comcare’s refusal to reimburse worker for breast reduction - AAT failed to consider case put by applicant - material error - AAT’s decision set aside - matter remitted
|Hammond v State of New South Wales (NSWCA) - summary dismissal - no error in summary dismissal of claims against State and Commonwealth - extension of time and leave to appeal refused
|Iron Mountain Mining Ltd v K & L Gates [No 2] (WASCA) - costs - applicant was not a third party payer under Legal Profession Act 2008 (WA) - appeal allowed
|NRW Pty Ltd as Trustee for NRW Unit Trust v Samsung C & T Corporation (WASC) - construction contract - determination that Samsung pay amount to NRW- certiorari refused - leave to enforce determination granted
|Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read)
|Howes v Comcare  FCA 1078
Federal Court of Australia
Administrative law - applicant lodged workers compensation claim with respondent - respondent determined liability for injuries including injuries to neck and shoulder - applicant claimed weight of her breasts increased pain in neck and shoulder and she had put on weight because of medication - applicant underwent breast reduction to reduce pain - applicant appealed against Administrative Appeals Tribunal’s affirmation of respondent’s decision to refuse her claim for reimbursement of cost of the breast reduction under s16 Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) - held: AAT considered and determined Comcare’s case but totally failed to address case as put by applicant - error was material - appeal allowed - AAT’s decision set aside - matter remitted.
|Hammond v State of New South Wales  NSWCA 304
Court of Appeal of New South Wales
Emmett & Gleeson JJA
Summary dismissal - Hammonds sought leave to appeal from primary judge’s summary dismissal of their claims against State of New South Wales and Commonwealth of Australia - Hammonds claimed State and Commonwealth vicariously liable for acts of judicial officers who decided matters adversely to them in various proceedings - Hammonds also claimed Commonwealth had duty to uphold law, monitor judges and correct judges’ errors of law - s13 Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) - ss7 & 8 Law Reform (Vicarious Liability) Act 1983 (NSW) - ss101(2)(c) & 101(2)(e) Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) - cll4, 8 &11 Civil Procedure Regulation 2012 (NSW) - rr4.10 & 51.9 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) - held: no error in primary judge’s conclusion that Statement of Claim disclosed no arguable cause of action against State or Commonwealth - even if Hammonds not outside limitation period for filing summons seeking leave to appeal, leave to appeal would not be granted - extension of time and leave to appeal refused.
|Iron Mountain Mining Ltd v K & L Gates [No 2]  WASC 373
Supreme Court of Western Australia
Costs - third party payer - client was director of applicant company - applicant sought assessment of costs rendered by respondent law firm to client - appeal from decision in which Registrar determined as preliminary issue that applicant was a third party payer within meaning of Legal Profession Act 2008 (WA) (LPA) - Leckenby v Note Printing Australia Ltd  VSC 538 - Note Printing Australia Ltd v Leckenby  VSCA 105 - held: director’s conviction of offences under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) rendered contractual indemnity and constitutional indemnity automatically void ab initio - applicant was not a third party payer under LPA - appeal allowed.
|NRW Pty Ltd as Trustee for NRW Unit Trust v Samsung C & T Corporation  WASC 369
Supreme Court of Western Australia
Judicial review - construction contract - Samsung sought to quash adjudicator’ determination under Construction Contracts Act 2004 (WA) that Samsung amount to NRW - held: payment dispute arose when Samsung disputed payment claim made by NRW - adjudication application made within permissible time - adjudicator determined merits of dispute by reference to terms of construction contract - any error by adjudicator in construing certain contractual provisions was no more than misconstruction of construction contract and error within adjudicator's jurisdiction - Samsung's claimed set offs did not provide valid reason to refuse leave to enforce determination - certiorari refused - leave to enforce determination granted.
Speech: “To be, or not to be, that is the question”
By William Shakespeare
(from Hamlet, spoken by Hamlet)
To be, or not to be, that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
And by opposing end them. To die—to sleep,
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to: 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep, perchance to dream—ay, there's the rub:
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause—there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life.
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
Th'oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of dispriz'd love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th'unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? Who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovere'd country, from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pitch and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry
And lose the name of action.