|Rinehart v Rinehart (FCA) - suppression - trusts - interim orders suppressing statement of claim refused
|The Herald & Weekly Times Ltd v Jessop (VSCA) - accident compensation - serious injury - no error in loss of earning capacity analysis - appeal dismissed
|H & G MacDonald Carriers Pty Ltd v Carson (VSC) - accident compensation - medical panel breached rules of natural justice - panel's answers quashed
|Sanrus Pty Ltd v Monto Coal 2 Pty Ltd (QSC) - pleadings - joint venture - paragraphs of statement of claim not struck out
|Doyle (WA) Pty Ltd v ING Real Estate Joondalup BV (WASCA) - work injury - trip and fall in shopping centre - employer refused indemnity from shopping centre owner
|Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read)
|Rinehart v Rinehart  FCA 1241
Federal Court of Australia
Suppression order - dispute between children of first respondent Georgina Hope Rinehart (GHR) and their mother as to GHR's alleged misconduct in administration of trust of which children were beneficiaries - respondents sought interim suppression orders under s37AI Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) - respondents sought to suppress contents of originating application and statement of claim and certain associated documents - abuse of process - whether harm would be occasioned in dealings with lenders and investors - scope of arbitration agreements/releases - held: respondents failed to establish credible case that proceeding constituted an abuse of process - counter-parties sophisticated commercial organisations well able to distinguish between allegations and factual findings - substance of allegations significantly in public domain - futile to make suppression order - interim suppression orders revoked - confidential addendum to statement of claim suppressed.
|The Herald & Weekly Times Ltd v Jessop  VSCA 292
Court of Appeal of Victoria
Neave & Kyrou JJA; Ginnane AJA
Accident compensation - serious injury - assessment of pre-injury earning capacity - employer appealed from decision in which County Court judge granted leave to worker to bring proceeding against employer for damages - order made pursuant to s134AB(16)(b) Accident Compensation Act 1985 (Vic) - necessity for worker to establish that, due to workplace injury, earning capacity decreased by 40 per cent or more - whether judge misconstrued s134AB(38)(f)(ii) in relation to loss of earning capacity analysis - held: judge correctly concluded worker satisfied statutory test in ss134AB(38)(e) & 134AB(38)(f) - appeal dismissed.
The Herald & Weekly Times Ltd
|H & G MacDonald Carriers Pty Ltd v Carson  VSC 586
Supreme Court of Victoria
Judicial review - accident compensation - Magistrates' Court of Victoria referred questions concerning worker's medical condition to medical panel pursuant to s45(1) Accident Compensation Act 1985 (Vic) - employer sought review of panel's answers - current work capacity - held: panel determined worker had no current work capacity on grounds of dependence on medication - that proposition had never been put or tested - opinion of panel in this regard came 'out of the blue' - employer did not have opportunity to address determinative issues - panel breached rules of natural justice and committed jurisdictional error - answers quashed.
H & G MacDonald Carriers Pty Ltd
|Sanrus Pty Ltd v Monto Coal 2 Pty Ltd  QSC 282
Supreme Court of Queensland
Pleadings - plaintiffs sued defendants for breach of contract arising from conduct in breach of joint venture agreement - defendants sought that paragraphs of plaintiffs' proposed amended consolidated statement of claim be struck out - held: defendants did not establish paragraphs contained irrelevant allegations or would prejudice or delay fair trial - allegations not so tenuous they should be struck out - no basis to strike out claim for damages - application dismissed.
Sanrus Pty Ltd
|Doyle (WA) Pty Ltd v ING Real Estate Joondalup BV  WASCA 215
Court of Appeal of Western Australia
Buss, Murphy & Mazza JJA
Work injury damages - employer pursuant to s93 Workers' Compensation and Injury
Management Act 1981 (WA) sought to recover amount from shopping centre owner in respect of liability to an employee for worker's compensation arising from injury suffered by employee at work - primary judge dismissed claim - significance of subsequent alterations - ss5B & 5F Civil Liability Act 2002 (WA) - held: primary judge did not err in finding potential danger was clear to pedestrians or in weighing the elements of s5(4) Occupiers Liability Act 1985 (WA) - appeal dismissed.
Doyle (WA) Pty Ltd