tttttttttt

Catchwords: CHILD WELFARE – care proceedings – statutory construction – interpretation – where guardian ad litem appointed for a child and young person in separate proceedings – where court found child and young person was incapable of giving proper instructions to a legal representative – whether appointment of guardian ad litem mandatory or discretionary – Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW) – interaction between ss 98(2A) and 100 of the Act CHILD WELFARE – care proceedings – where guardian ad litem appointed for a young person by Supreme Court – whether young person incapable of giving proper instructions to a legal representative ...

Catchwords: EQUITY — Trusts and trustees — Resulting trusts — Purchase money trusts — Where appellant purchased properties in the name of the respondent pursuant to a power of attorney — Whether appellant contributed to the purchase price — Whether appellant manifested an intention inconsistent with beneficial ownership of properties — Where appellant provided to the respondent a will to sign which clearly acknowledged her ownership of the properties — Where appellant submitted tax returns on behalf of the respondent which were not trustee returns ...

Catchwords: WORKERS COMPENSATION – where primary Judge dismissed an appeal from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) with respect to the operation of s 53(3)(c) of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) (SRC Act) – where appellant sought relief under SRC Act for mental injury claimed to have been suffered prior to 1997 – where workers’ compensation claim in respect of injury not lodged until 2016 – whether appellant gave notice as soon as practicable after becoming aware of injury – whether Tribunal and primary Judge erred in findings concerning onus of proof – whether open to Tribunal to make factual findings concerning advice given to appellant in 1997 by appellant’s psychologist – whether Tribunal ignored the operation of the rule in Jones v Dunkel (2016) 258 CLR 308; [2016] HCA 35 – whether primary Judge incorrectly applied principles of reasonableness – whether primary Judge conducted impermissible merits review ...

Catchwords: MIGRATION – appeal from orders of a single judge declining to make an order restraining the Minister from refusing to grant the appellant a visa on the basis of character grounds under s 501(6)(h) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – Vietnamese national alleged to have deliberately acted against national regulations – Interpol red notice issued by the Vietnamese government in relation to appellant – where prohibition sought is pre-emptory in nature – consideration of the discretionary nature of constitutional writs – preferable that the administrative decision-making process run its natural course – relief sought refused in the exercise of discretion – appeal dismissed ...

Catchwords: MIGRATION – appeal from order to set aside decision of the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs to refuse to grant the respondent a protection visa – Chinese national alleged to have defrauded banks or other monetary institutions of loans – Interpol red notice issued by Chinese government in relation to the respondent – whether primary judge erred in holding that the Minister misconstrued or misapplied s 501(6)(h) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether it was reasonable to infer from the Interpol red notice that the respondent would present a risk to the Australian community or a segment of it – consideration of the meaning of “risk” – conflicting first instance authority – relevance of country information concerning Chinese criminal justice system – Minister’s reasons unreasonable on both lines of authority – appeal dismissed ...

Orders: (1) The appeal be allowed. (2) Declaration 8 made on 26 October 2020 in VID781/2019 be set aside by consent. (3) Order 4 and declaration 7 made on 26 October 2020 in VID781/2019 be set aside and in lieu thereof it be ordered that: (a) the third further amended originating application by the applicant (Icon) as against the second respondent (QBE) be dismissed; and (b) Icon pay QBE’s costs of the proceeding to be agreed or assessed. (4) Icon pay QBE’s costs of the appeal as agreed or...