The Petal: Australian Case Law Daily from JADE OpenLaw

Send us Fan Mail
Fifteen decisions in the Federal Courts edition for Monday 9 November 2026: one from the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia, five from the Federal Court and nine from the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1) appellate jurisdiction. The opening story: a unanimous Full Court holds that a Fair Work costs order for an unreasonable act or omission needs a causal link between that conduct and the costs, so an employer that abandoned a late restraint claim was not liable on that basis, and flags the "without reasonable cause" gateway instead. Then a worked example on late evidence at an Administrative Review Tribunal migration review, and the registry. The Full Court decision and the nine family appeals also feature in today's Courts of Appeal brief.
Practice and Procedure Desk (opening story).
HealthX Group Pty Ltd v Palling [2026] FCAFC 141 (Snaden, Meagher and Bennett JJ, 9 November 2026) - Signal: Practice and Procedure; JL p. 11. Unanimous. An order under s 570(2)(b) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) requires a causal nexus between the unreasonable act or omission and the incurring of costs; where costs were incurred because the restraint claim was pursued at all, not because of delay, the order was not open on either standard of review. Withdrawing a contention is not of itself unreasonable, and negligence or inefficiency is not unreasonableness. Obiter: a time-limited restraint claim brought too late to be decided in time might lack reasonable cause under s 570(2)(a). An appellant cannot establish error in a failure to make a finding not sought below (Coulton v Holcombe); the profit share was not discretionary; considerable doubt that profit share or resignation-notice terms are "safety net contractual entitlements" under s 12. Appeal allowed in part; the costs order replaced by costs thrown away on the reasonable notice claim; no order as to the costs of the appeal. JADE
Public Law Desk (a worked example).
Toalei v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2026] FCA 1672 (Dowling J, 9 November 2026) - Signal: Illustrative. Procedural fairness under s 55(1) of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth) where an 81-page bundle is served immediately before the hearing of a s 501CA(4) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) revocation review: prior access to summonsed material, the key report identified, overnight consideration, questioning the next day, an invitation to make submissions, earlier opportunities to file evidence; transcript exchanges can defeat a fairness claim; materiality as a realistic possibility of a different outcome (LPDT); the limits in ss 500(6H), (6J) and (6L). No outcome stated in the synopsis. JADE
Family appeals (at depth in today's Courts of Appeal brief).
Bray & Poole [2026] FedCFamC1A 194 (Williams, Jarrett and Behrens JJ, 4 November 2026) - Signal: Doctrine; property settlement, financial agreements; JL p. 16. JADE
Massen & Massen [2026] FedCFamC1A 200 (Williams, Kari and Parker JJ, 6 November 2026) - Signal: Illustrative; appeal grounds; JL p. 20. JADE
Wick & Hopper [2026] FedCFamC1A 198 (Christie J, 4 November 2026) - parenting orders; JL p. 25. JADE
Zenta & Zenta [2026] FedCFamC1A 203 (Schonell J, 6 November 2026) - parenting orders; JL p. 14. JADE
Mikhailova & Parrino [2026] FedCFamC1A 202 (Schonell J, 6 November 2026) - Signal: Illustrative; extension of time; JL p. 22. JADE
Sallings (No 2) [2026] FedCFamC1A 197 (Schonell J, 4 November 2026) - appellate jurisdiction. JADE
Rothman & Rothman [2026] FedCFamC1A 199 (Schonell J, 4 November 2026) - extension of time. JADE
Lunde & Lunde (No 2) [2026] FedCFamC1A 201 (Schonell J, 5 November 2026) - extension of time. JADE
Panza & Adriaansen [2026] FedCFamC1A 192 (McClelland DCJ, 2 November 2026) - property settlement. JADE
Registry (list only, no outcome stated).
Al Shawi v Ghaffari-Hesari (No 2) [2026] FCA 1673 (O'Callaghan J, 5 November 2026) - corporate governance. JADE
Guider v Coutts Lawyers & Conveyancers Pty Ltd, in the matter of Coutts Lawyers & Conveyancers Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 1679 (Markovic J, 2 November 2026) - interlocutory orders. JADE
Australian Postal Corporation v Quinn [2026] FCA 1682 (Dowling J, 9 November 2026) - workers compensation assessment. JADE
Glover v Al-Talebi (Suppression) [2026] FCA 1680 (Bromwich J, 9 November 2026) - suppression. JADE
Full typeset judgments are in the Judicial Ledger. Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail
Thirteen headnoted appellate decisions from four courts in the Court of Appeal edition of Monday 9 November 2026, with the New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia and ACT editions of the same day folded in. Double counting in sentencing police officers; Fair Work costs that the conduct did not cause; hardship and reliance in setting aside a financial agreement; reasons that hide the path; a native title holder's right to be heard; an off-the-plan sunset rescission refused; and admissions, totality and youth sentencing. Violence against a woman in a mental health crisis, family violence, sexual offences against children and a child's terrorism offence are reported as legal doctrine only, as are the children's matters.
Criminal Law Desk (opening story; doctrine only).
Black v R; Trautsch v R [2026] NSWCCA 185 - a s 21A(2)(f) gratuitous cruelty finding for an assault risks double counting and is not engaged merely because violence exceeds the ordinary (result agreed; reasoning Dhanji J's, McNaughton J noting no zero baseline for police, Coleman J that it is not an absolute bar); available for the prohibited weapon offence; trust and authority under s 21A(2)(k) are distinct and a judge finding both must articulate what one adds. Leave granted, appeals allowed, both resentenced to full-time imprisonment (Dhanji, McNaughton and Coleman JJ; also Monday's New South Wales edition). JADE
Practice and Procedure Desk.
HealthX Group Pty Ltd v Palling [2026] FCAFC 141 - a s 570(2)(b) Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) costs order needs a causal nexus between the unreasonable act or omission and the incurring of costs; withdrawing a contention is not of itself unreasonable; obiter, a late restraint claim may lack reasonable cause under s 570(2)(a); no error in a failure to make a finding not sought below. Appeal allowed in part (Snaden, Meagher and Bennett JJ; also today's Federal Courts brief). JADE
Family Law Desk (legal doctrine only; no party identified; all nine also in today's Federal Courts brief).
Bray & Poole [2026] FedCFamC1A 194 - s 90K(1)(d) hardship needs some comparison of positions with and without the agreement, not a net asset accounting; s 90K(1)(b) misrepresentation needs inducement; Browne v Dunn and affidavit evidence; Kennon: lay evidence suffices, litigation conduct is not family violence without more; unexplained equal contributions plainly wrong. Order 1 appeal dismissed; property orders set aside and remitted for rehearing before a different judge (Williams, Jarrett and Behrens JJ). JADE
Massen & Massen [2026] FedCFamC1A 200 - reasons that do not expose the path to a critical finding are an error of law. Appeal allowed; s 79 applications remitted for rehearing by a different judge (Williams, Kari and Parker JJ). JADE
Zenta & Zenta [2026] FedCFamC1A 203 - findings disturbed only if demonstrably wrong or glaringly improbable; best interests are values, not facts. Appeal dismissed (Schonell J). JADE
Wick & Hopper [2026] FedCFamC1A 198 - interim parenting orders: no statutory baseline; unilateral relocation does not alter s 61C responsibility; consequences of untested allegations may be weighed without findings. Appeal dismissed; the allegations remain for the final hearing (Christie J). JADE
Panza & Adriaansen [2026] FedCFamC1A 192 - a partial property distribution is neither notional property nor a s 90SM(4) contribution; reasons silent on its s 90SM(5) treatment vitiated the adjustment; discretion re-exercised. Ground 5(c) upheld, otherwise dismissed (McClelland DCJ). JADE
Sallings (No 2) [2026] FedCFamC1A 197 - dismissal of a leave application finally determines the controversy; relitigation is an abuse rightly rejected for filing. Application dismissed (Schonell J). JADE
Mikhailova & Parrino [2026] FedCFamC1A 202 - on an extension of time the substantial issue threshold comes first; s 79A(1)(a) looks to circumstances at or before the orders. Application dismissed (Schonell J). JADE
Rothman & Rothman [2026] FedCFamC1A 199 - transcript deadline extended on condition the appeal stands dismissed in default; no dispensation (Schonell J). JADE
Lunde & Lunde (No 2) [2026] FedCFamC1A 201 - time extended and the hearing vacated; liberty to apply should be used (Schonell J). JADE
Public Law Desk.
Ut-Alkar Aboriginal Corporation v Chief Executive Department of Environment [2026] QSC 263 - a s 527 Environmental Protection Act 1994 (Qld) appeal is a rehearing that cannot be resolved by consent; a directly affected non-party native title holder was entitled to a reasonable opportunity to be heard; a submission on the file is not a hearing. Consent orders set aside and the appeals remitted to the Land Court (Henry J; Queensland edition). JADE
Commercial Law Desk.
Casula Estate Pty Ltd ACN 643 475 414 as trustee for Casula Estate Unit Trust v Singhal and; Casula Estate Pty Ltd ACN 643 475 414 as trustee for Casula Estate Unit Trust v Lenka [2026] NSWSC 1409 - s 66ZS Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) does not qualify the vendor's contractual preconditions; unreasonable conduct includes communications with purchasers; self-representation does not lower the standard of proof. Claims dismissed; deposits repaid with interest (Pike J; New South Wales edition). JADE
Criminal Law Desk (doctrine only; no complainant identified).
Singh v The King [2026] VSCA 262 - admissions to contextual conduct are admissible; incident-specific admissions may be directed to that charge; no unrequested ambiguity direction under s 16(1) Jury Directions Act 2015 (Vic). Extension refused (Boyce, Donaghue and Kaye JJA). JADE
Ollis v The King [2026] VSCA 254 - absence of common aggravating features is not mitigating; comparables a yardstick; totality judged against all sentences and cumulation orders. Extension refused (Walker JA). JADE
R v RK [2026] NSWSC 1414 - diminished relevance of youth is not an overriding principle in terrorism sentencing; no principle mandates full-time imprisonment for every young offender. Community correction order (Campbell J; New South Wales edition). JADE
Docket and registry (Lu v Tasman from a synopsis; the rest listed without a headnote; no outcome stated).
Lu v Tasman 61 Bh Pty Ltd [2026] NSWSC 1419 - capitulation costs; offer of compromise checklist; indemnity costs (synopsis only). JADE
Kchevetskaia v Korlevic [2026] NSWSC 1243 - pleadings. JADE
Michales v CharterLaw Legal Pty Ltd [2026] NSWSC 1416 - strike out. JADE
In the matter of Perpetual Trustee Company Ltd (No 2) [2026] NSWSC 1420 - scheme of arrangement. JADE
Toohey v Mapp [2026] NSWSC 1417 - probate. JADE
Wong v Mooney [2026] NSWLEC 1745 - tree dispute. JADE
Manly Property Group No. 2 Pty Ltd v Northern Beaches Council [2026] NSWLEC 1747 - development consent appeal. JADE
Sutton Property Pty Ltd v AAKK Investments Pty Ltd [2026] QSC 266 - costs. JADE
Rotella v Meschberger [2026] WASC 486 - estate administration. JADE
Westpac Banking Corporation v Farrant [No 7] [2026] WASC 488 - interlocutory orders. JADE
DPP v Chan (No 4) [2026] ACTSC 426 - criminal trial procedure. JADE
DPP v Chan (No 3) [2026] ACTSC 424 - sentencing. JADE
Two family property cases are remitted for rehearing, the interim parenting allegations are untested and remain for the final hearing, two family appeals are still to be heard, and the Queensland appeals return to the Land Court; nothing is predicted. Anyone facing a charge in the registry's criminal listings is presumed innocent.
Full typeset judgments are in the Judicial Ledger. Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail
Seventeen decisions from the Trade Marks Office and four state tribunals in the Tribunals edition of Monday 9 November 2026, five with headnotes and eight more worked examples from synopses. Why an unmarked choice on a Western Australian enduring power of guardianship makes it invalid, and whether an all-functions guardian can consent to restrictive practices in aged care; a strata appeal where the Tribunal decided an issue it had told a party not to argue; three trade mark oppositions; and worked examples on spam-filtered email, settlement-offer costs, objector reviews, time limits, land tax and health practitioner discipline.
Tribunals Desk: guardianship and restrictive practices (lead; headnoted).
M [2026] WASAT 130 - an "All functions authorised" enduring power of guardianship reaches restrictive practices consent under the Aged Care Act 2024 (Cth); no election between options 4A and 4B makes the instrument invalid; s 110N is not used to add a function or fix scope; an invalid EPG is no less restrictive alternative. EPG declared invalid; variation dismissed; joint limited guardians appointed. JADE
Tribunals Desk: procedural fairness in a strata appeal (headnoted).
The Owners – Strata Plan No. 66375 v Baltusrol Pty Ltd and Stollery [2026] NSWCATAP 356 - a material denial of procedural fairness is a question of law, appellable as of right; confining submissions to one issue and deciding another without notice breaches ss 38(2) and 38(5)(c); no forensic waiver; materiality is undemanding. Appeal allowed; remitted to a differently constituted Tribunal. JADE
Tribunals Desk: trade mark oppositions (headnoted; all three registrations refused).
Luyten 3D Pty Ltd v Contour 3D Pty Ltd [2026] ATMO 222 - s 41: a composite word keeps its descriptive meaning; no sales, advertising or customer evidence; stylised logo use carries minimal weight; examination acceptance is no answer. JADE
Opposition by Paraskevas Mourikis to registration of trade mark application number [2026] ATMO 219 - s 58 ownership by first use; undeclared documents given no weight. JADE
Lesun (Shenzhen) Technology Co Ltd v Cong Ning [2026] ATMO 218 - s 62A bad faith: knowledge plus acceptable commercial standards; reproduction and a pattern of 23 applications for other traders' brands. JADE
Tribunals Desk: worked examples from synopses (frameworks; no outcomes stated).
Cameron v East Coast Trailers and Horse Floats Pty Ltd [2026] NSWCATAP 355 - s 13A Electronic Transactions Act 2000 (NSW): an email in a spam folder is received if capable of retrieval; contracts by email; the limits of a repairer's lien. JADE
Mavid Construction Pty Ltd v Blair [2026] NSWCATAP 352 - r 38 costs after a rejected Calderbank offer; unreasonableness a factor, not a precondition. JADE
Hawkins v Yarra Ranges SC [2026] VCAT 936 - the notice of decision defines review jurisdiction; no first-instance ruling on an unapplied-for land use. JADE
Sweeney v Bass Coast SC [2026] VCAT 931 - a special charge review: time runs from the date of issue, not receipt; the Hunter Valley factors. JADE
Enugu Pty Ltd as trustee for the Cornock Family Trust v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2026] NSWCATAD 345 - the s 10AA Land Tax Management Act 1956 (NSW) dominant use test, step by step. JADE
Health Care Complaints Commission v Panetta [2026] NSWCATOD 143 and Health Care Complaints Commission v Fouad [2026] NSWCATOD 144 - framework only: onus, the Briginshaw standard, peer opinion, contemporaneous documents, s 176D. JADE (Panetta) JADE (Fouad)
Medical Board of Australia v Singh (Sanction) [2026] QCAT 491 - framework only: the Lockie sanction factors, cancellation versus suspension. JADE
Registry (list only; by subject; no outcome): Warhurst v Fuentes [2026] NSWCATAP 349 (appeal grounds); Baz v Shearer [2026] NSWCATAP 353 (appeal grounds); YVT v YVU [2026] NSWCATAP 357 (appeal grounds; anonymised); Paramedicine Board of Australia v Halligan [2026] VCAT 939 (uncategorised).
Case notes
M [2026] WASAT 130 - Dr E Marillier, Senior Member, 6 November 2026. Signal: Doctrine; headnote JL 23. Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) ss 4, 43, 45(1), 110E, 110G, 110K, 110N; Guardianship and Administration Regulations 2005 (WA) Sch 1; Aged Care Act 2024 (Cth) s 28(2)(c); Aged Care Rules 2025 (Cth) r 6.20(1)(b). LK and EB [2013] WASAT 70 and Re C [2012] WASAT 50 distinguished; HL and HS [2012] WASAT 118 applied. Under a limited order or limited EPG restrictive practices must be specified. Why aired: a common drafting defect, and the new Commonwealth restrictive practices regime, in one decision.
The Owners – Strata Plan No. 66375 v Baltusrol Pty Ltd and Stollery [2026] NSWCATAP 356 - M Tyson, Senior Member, N Kennedy, Senior Member, 9 November 2026. Signal: Practice & Procedure; headnote JL 21. Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) ss 38, 80(2)(b), Sch 4 cl 8(2); Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW) ss 132, 232; Nathanson v Minister for Home Affairs [2022] HCA 26. The characterisation question and the respondents' merger and estoppel objection were remitted; consent orders with a renewal right need a compliance period. Why aired: protecting reserved contentions when a tribunal narrows the hearing.
The trade mark decisions: Luyten (Tracey Berger, delegate, 3 November 2026; headnote JL 29), Mourikis (Benjamin Goldsworthy, delegate, 26 October 2026; JL 26), Lesun (Tracey Berger, delegate, 26 October 2026; JL 27); Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) ss 41, 55(1), 58, 62A, 221. Cameron (P Durack SC and H Woods, Senior Members), Mavid (E Bishop SC and Dr D Goldman, Senior Members), Hawkins (6 November 2026; member not legible in the edition), Sweeney (Sarah Porritt, Senior Member), Enugu (Ea MacIntyre, Senior Member, as printed), Panetta, Fouad and Singh are aired from the edition's Signal synopses (Illustrative); no outcome is aired.
The guardianship matter is reported for its legal principles, and no one in it is identified. The health practitioner discipline matters are reported by their legal framework only, no practitioner is named, and where any related proceeding is before a court the presumption of innocence applies. In Baltusrol questions were remitted; nothing here predicts how they will end. Headnoted outcomes are as the headnotes state them. Full typeset judgments are in the Judicial Ledger. Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail
The Petal's New Zealand edition for 9 November 2026 carries nine decisions newly reported, all from the Court of Appeal, and all nine are aired. The thread is who gets a say, and how far it goes: the Commissioner of Inland Revenue gets a vote, not a veto; a neighbour gets adequate information, not a perfect assessment; a covenant can sign the say away; and a prisoner's appeal goes ahead unless the abuse is plain.
Commercial Law Desk (lead).
Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Pronk as Provisional Trustee [2026] NZCA 534 - the ratio of Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Wilson [2017] NZCA 100 is confined to a Commissioner who is the sole, non-consenting creditor (s 328(4) of the Insolvency Act 2006), and its remark that the Commissioner's Tax Administration Act 1994 powers cannot be reconciled with the s 331 voting provisions was obiter; where the tax debt is one of many and a compliant proposal is made under subpt 2 of pt 5, the Insolvency Act governs and the Court may approve a proposal under s 333 binding the Commissioner even though he voted against it; the regimes run in parallel and his tax duties give him no veto; tax-system integrity arguments go to expedience under s 333(3)(c), not reasonableness under s 333(3)(b); bankruptcy is protective, not punitive. Appeal dismissed (Ellis, Harland and Radich JJ, 4 November 2026). JADE
Xray Trust Ltd v Queenstown Lakes District Council [2026] NZCA 528 - on a non-notification decision under ss 95A-95E of the Resource Management Act 1991, an affected person approval is the only way a neighbour's agreement can be taken into account; the applicant's misstatement was immaterial; information must be adequate to understand the activity, assess the magnitude of effects and identify affected persons (Discount Brands), and a consent authority reasonably satisfied of its reliability may adopt the applicant's assessment; a condition is uncertain only if its meaning stays unclear after objective, contextual interpretation, and a catch-all condition required updated management plans. Further evidence declined; appeal dismissed (Palmer, Campbell and Edwards JJ, 4 November 2026). JADE
Reed v Waikato District Council [2026] NZCA 544 - a registered no complaints encumbrance, construed objectively, can preclude judicial review of a resource consent if its language is sufficiently clear, without naming judicial review; a claim to quash the consent was a prohibited objection; a land use consent runs with the land (s 134), so the identity of the applicant did not trigger the release clause; a liquidated damages clause was enabling, not exclusive, and strike-out for the continuing breach was appropriate. Appeal dismissed (Thomas, Downs and Anderson JJ, 6 November 2026). JADE
Practice and Procedure Desk.
Tatana v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2026] NZCA 543 - on a Registrar's referral under s 164A of the Senior Courts Act 2016, a proceeding may be struck out under s 164B only if plainly abusive, the abuse clear beyond doubt; lack of merit, untenability and remediable non-compliance are not enough, and strike-out is not automatic; on appeal the question is whether the appeal itself is abusive; no different test applies to habeas corpus appeals, which Parliament left as of right; the misnamed respondent was substituted and the appeal confined to the two High Court decisions. Strike-out declined; the appeal proceeds (Katz J, 6 November 2026). JADE
Hona v Māori Land Court [2026] NZCA 539 - a rehearing appeal under r 47 of the Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005 runs on the High Court record; an appeal is not a vehicle for reviving a declined interlocutory application; a serious allegation that a court recording was falsified needs a proper evidential foundation before forensic examination is ordered. Production orders declined; a brief extension granted (Katz and Whata JJ, 5 November 2026) JADE. Tangikaroro and Whakaangiangi Kaitiaki Group Trust v Ingleby New Zealand LP [2026] NZCA 532 - under r 36 the appellant must show legal aid was applied for before the notice of appeal; dispensing with security requires merit enough for a reasonable and solvent litigant to pursue the appeal, and generic, unparticularised grounds are hopeless. Review declined (Johnstone J, 4 November 2026) JADE. Jindal v District Court at Auckland [2026] NZCA 527 - review of the sealing of a judgment with an amended costs schedule declined, the same issue having been decided against the applicant (Ellis J, 3 November 2026) JADE.
Criminal Law Desk.
The King [2026] NZCA 537 (the edition prints no appellant name) - knowledge of a drug importation and its scale, as an aggravating fact under s 24(2)(c) of the Sentencing Act 2002, is proved if, on all plausible inferences, there is no reasonable possibility the offender lacked it; each adverse inference need not be proved beyond reasonable doubt; Crown delay in responding to a proposed summary of facts warranted the same 20 per cent plea reduction allowed to others similarly placed; addiction is reflected within the lesser role category (Berkland). Both appeals allowed and sentences reduced (Whata, Dunningham and Becroft JJ, 6 November 2026) JADE. Taotahi v The King [2026] NZCA 536 - reliance on a disputed aggravating fact without proof under s 24(2) does not make a sentence manifestly excessive where it does not change the aggravating feature (a weapon was established anyway); parity requires a gross and unjustifiable disparity. Appeal dismissed (Palmer, Harland and Tahana JJ, 5 November 2026) JADE.
The habeas corpus appeal in Tatana and the appeal in Hona continue. Nothing in this episode predicts any outcome.
Full typeset judgments are in the Judicial Ledger. Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail
Twelve headnoted appellate decisions from four courts in the Court of Appeal edition of Friday 6 November 2026, with the New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia editions of the same roll-up folded in. A Kable challenge the court declined to decide; emails as information, not property, in self-defence; a State that submitted to jurisdiction; liability now and damages later at VCAT; and duress by caveat. An abuse claim, domestic violence offending and a sexual offence are reported as legal doctrine only.
Public Law Desk (opening story).
Rapid Legal Solutions Pty Ltd v State of Queensland [2026] QCA 227 - a court ordinarily will not decide a constitutional challenge to provisions that do not bear on the party; the s 9 Acts Interpretation Act 1954 (Qld) severance presumption yields only to a positive all-or-nothing intention, not reduced effectiveness; severing ss 87ZM and 87ZQ(3)(b) Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 (Qld) leaves Pt 5B's purpose intact. Appeal dismissed with costs; the Kable question not decided (Bond and Doyle JJA, Cooper J; also Friday's Queensland edition). JADE
Clarkson v Ray White Gladstone [2026] QCA 228 - "residents" in s 75(iv) of the Constitution means natural persons only (Howe binding); s 2C Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) cannot alter the Constitution. Appeal dismissed (Bond and Doyle JJA, Hindman J; also Friday's Queensland edition). JADE
Parole Board Queensland v James [2026] QCA 226 - exceptional circumstances under s 194(1)(a) Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld) must justify more favourable treatment on the release date; a non-retrospective concession is not of itself exceptional (Doyle JA and Hindman J; Bond JA no view). Appeal allowed, the primary judge's orders set aside (Bond and Doyle JJA, Hindman J; also Friday's Queensland edition). JADE
Criminal Law Desk (the self-defence matter is pending; no one identified).
R v Xerri (a pseudonym) [2026] NSWCCA 183 - on a s 5B Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) stated case, confined to the facts stated, emails shown only as text on a screen were information, not "property" under s 418(2)(c) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), and reading them aloud was not "interference". Acquittal quashed and the conviction appeal remitted to the District Court to be determined according to law (N Adams CJ at CL, Cavanagh and Muston JJ; also Friday's New South Wales edition). Nothing is predicted. JADE
Brooker v R [2026] NSWCCA 181 - where sentencing remarks admit competing interpretations, error is not inferred if the preferable one shows none; a quantity just into the commercial range remains serious. Leave granted, appeal dismissed (Ward ACJ, Dhanji and Yehia JJ; also Friday's New South Wales edition). JADE
Gatt v R [2026] NSWCCA 182 - rejecting an unchallenged psychologist's opinion without forewarning was procedurally unfair and caused practical injustice under s 5(1)(c). Appeal allowed and resentenced (Roberts J, N Adams CJ at CL agreeing; Dhanji J would have imposed a lesser sentence; also Friday's New South Wales edition). Reported as legal doctrine only. JADE
Penhaligon v Attorney-General for the State of Queensland [2026] QCA 225 - under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) an offence "involving violence" need not have violence as an element; mere physical contact is not enough; violence found by two routes. Appeal dismissed with costs, at the preliminary hearing stage (Boddice and Doyle JJA, Morrison AJA; also Friday's Queensland edition). Reported as legal doctrine only; nothing is predicted. JADE
Practice and Procedure Desk (the Victorian claim is reported as legal doctrine only; its allegations are untested).
Queensland v Statham (a pseudonym) [2026] VSCA 260 - complete diversity does not attach to the third limb of s 75(iv); s 58 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) precludes another State's Supreme Court exercising jurisdiction in a contract or tort suit against a State unless it submits (Breavington followed); submission is objective and needs no knowledge of the right; a transfer application invokes jurisdiction. Leave granted, appeal dismissed (Orr P, Walker and Donaghue JJA). JADE
Bahl Enterprises Pty Ltd v Sikandar [2026] VSCA 261 - under s 78(1) VCAT Act the question is whether it was open to the Tribunal to form the belief; failure to file a defence creates a present disadvantage; s 78(2)(b)(i) permits determining liability with damages to be assessed. Leave to appeal refused (Walker, Richards and Donaghue JJA). JADE
He v N & G Superannuation Pty Ltd acting as trustee for N & G Superannuation Trust (No 2) [2026] NSWCA 236 - recusal procedure on a multi-member bench; bias must be raised distinctly and promptly; reopening after reserve only in exceptional circumstances (s 64 Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)). Applications refused, motion dismissed with costs (Leeming, Kirk and Ball JJA; also Friday's New South Wales edition). JADE
Varmedja v Hodoba [2026] NSWSC 1404 - worked example from the synopsis: r 42.21 UCPR security for costs principles apply in probate; an unparticularised incapacity plea suggests a weak case; a heavy candour burden for stultification; stay until security is provided (Scruby J; Friday's New South Wales edition). JADE
Commercial Law Desk.
He v N & G Superannuation Pty Ltd acting as trustee for N & G Superannuation Trust (No 3) [2026] NSWCA 237 - a caveat and a threat of specific performance in a genuine contractual dispute are not illegitimate pressure on either duress standard; no special disadvantage; no loss proved. Appeal dismissed with costs (Leeming, Kirk and Ball JJA; also Friday's New South Wales edition). JADE
L & L International Investment Pty Ltd v Body Corporate for Arundel Springs East CTS 53560 [2026] QCA 229 - applying Project Blue Sky, a caretaker remuneration review advice not complying with s 132(1) BCCM Act 1997 (Qld) is not a nullity, so QCAT had jurisdiction. Leave to appeal refused with costs (Mullins P, Doyle JA, Freeburn J; also Friday's Queensland edition). JADE
Also on the docket (list only, no outcome stated).
In the matter of Norvista P4 Pty Ltd [2026] NSWSC 1402 - winding up. JADE
In the matter of Quasar Constructions (Commercial) Pty Ltd (in liquidation) [2026] NSWSC 1408 - joinder. JADE
The Capital Markets Company Limited v Sommerin (No 2) [2026] NSWSC 1411 - costs. JADE
KenoGO Pty Ltd v Commonwealth of Australia [2026] NSWSC 1412 - discovery. JADE
Wright v The Estate of Hanger [2026] NSWSC 1403 - strike out. JADE
Perpetual Corporate Trust Limited v The Residents Development Pty Ltd (mgrs and recs apptd) [2026] NSWSC 1410 - default judgment. JADE
Robot X Limited v Placer Robotics Pty Ltd & Anor (No 3) [2026] NSWSC 1413 - costs. JADE
State of New South Wales v Mustapha [2026] NSWSC 1406 - interim supervision order (listed only). JADE
Appwam Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council [2026] NSWLEC 1744 - development consent. JADE
Abuduhou v Blacktown City Council [2026] NSWLEC 1743 - development consent. JADE
Golding v Australian Securities & Investments Commission [2026] WASC 489 - company registration. JADE
Some matters are still to be decided: the Xerri conviction appeal returns to the District Court, the Statham claim continues in Victoria and its allegations are untested, Penhaligon was decided at a preliminary stage, and the interim supervision order matter is listed only. Anyone facing a charge is presumed innocent; nothing here predicts any outcome.
Full typeset judgments are in the Judicial Ledger. Theme music by Michael Green SC.