Latest Judgments
Judgments are generally published within 24 hours of being made available by Judges' staff, often earlier. In cases of high media interest, we endeavour to publish judgments within 1 hour of being delivered by the Court.
If you cannot find a judgment, check Federal Law Search; it will tell you the status of the matter before the Court, including whether a judgment has been delivered.
Today's published judgments
Costs ; Copyright
Chou v Metstech Pty Ltd (Costs) [2024] FCAFC 39
COSTS - whether costs should follow the event - where respondents successful in substance but primary judge's declarations were amended in the interests of clarity
19 Mar 2024 | YATES, DOWNES AND JACKMAN JJ
Patents
MMD Australia Pty Ltd v Camco Engineering Pty Ltd [2024] FCAFC 38
PATENTS - construction of patent - invention of tooth construction for a mineral sizer - meaning of "front cover which is weldingly secured to and seated in face to face contact with the front face of the support body" - where primary judge rejected claim because, inter alia, "face to face contact" requires physical contact over most of two faces
19 Mar 2024 | YATES, BURLEY AND JACKMAN JJ
Migration
Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs v MZAPC [2024] FCAFC 34
MIGRATION - application by Minister for leave to appeal against grant of interlocutory injunction restraining the removal of the respondent from Australia - where respondent has exhausted all avenues of review and appeal and does not contest that he is an unlawful non-citizen -where respondent has sought personal intervention of Minister under ss 195A and 417 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) - where some requests remain pending and others have not been referred to the Minister by officers acting in purported compliance with ultra vires Ministerial Instructions - where Minister's powers are personal and non-compellable - whether respondent has a sufficient legal or equitable right sufficient to support an injunction - whether equitable relief sought by respondent impossible or futile
INJUNCTIONS - application by Minister for leave to appeal against grant of interlocutory injunction restraining the removal of the respondent from Australia - where injunction sought is in aid of maintenance of the status quo pending the speculative exercise of a personal, non-compellable power - whether equitable relief sought by respondent impossible or futile
18 Mar 2024 | SARAH C DERRINGTON, COLVIN AND JACKSON JJ
Social Security ; Statutory Interpretation ; Practice and Procedure
Secretary, Department of Social Services v Vader (by his litigation guardian) [2024] FCAFC 37
SOCIAL SECURITY - appeal from decision of Federal Court of Australia, dismissing an appeal on a question of law from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal concerning eligibility for the disability support pension - where respondent does not meet ordinary residency requirements for the pension- where respondent claims he meets residency requirements by operation of a bilateral agreement between Australia and the United States enacted into domestic law by the Social Security (International Agreements) Act 1999 (Cth) - whether respondent has accumulated a "United States period of coverage"
STATUTORY INTERPRETATION - where interpretation of statute depends on United States law - where no expert evidence led as to the content of US Social Security laws - where findings as to content of United States law would be knowingly incomplete and potentially erroneous absent expert evidence - where correct construction of statute turns upon findings of foreign law based on how those laws would be construed in that country - approach to construing text of foreign law by relying on the presumption that domestic principles of statutory interpretation are the same as those under United States law rejected on the basis that it would not give effect to Parliament's intention in enacting the bilateral agreement
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - where in the absence of expert evidence the appellant has not established any error in the conclusion of the primary judge - where appellant applied for leave to adduce fresh evidence on the appeal - where fresh evidence would cause delay and further expense to Court and parties - where appellant could have adduced fresh evidence at trial in circumstances where the content of foreign law was not merely a question of fact but also of law - application to adduce further evidence on appeal pursuant to s 27 of the Federal of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) refused
18 Mar 2024 | PERRY, CHARLESWORTH AND JACKSON JJ