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.

Can't find a judgment? If you cannot find a judgment, look up the matter in Federal Law Search. It will tell you the status of the matter, and a whether a judgment has been delivered.

You can also search our judgments collection.


Today's published judgments

Practice and Procedure
Finnegan v Kemner (No 3) [2026] FCA 1402
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for leave to amend reply – rr 16.53 and 26.11 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – proposed amended reply seeks to withdraw admission – grant of leave is in the interests of administration of justice – prejudice to the respondent is minimal – leave granted
21 Sep 2026 |  JACKSON J


Bankruptcy and Insolvency
James v Narang Bir-Rong Aboriginal Corporation, in the matter of Narang Bir-Rong Aboriginal Corporation (Special Administrators Appointed) [2026] FCA 1408
BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY – corporation incorporated under Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006 (Cth) (CATSI Act) – relevant statutory provisions of CATSI Act – application by joint and several administrators for an order that the corporation be wound up pursuant to s 526-1 of the CATSI Act – whether corporation is insolvent – order made to wind up corporation – costs of application ordered on an indemnity basis
4 Sep 2026 |  WIGNEY J


Practice and Procedure
Sharpin v Qantas Airways Limited [2026] FCA 1399
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for non-standard discovery – rr 20.12 and 20.15 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – whether order for discovery should be made – categories of documents relating to applicant’s medical history – whether documents directly relevant to issues raised by pleadings – relevance of documents relating to alleged “medically significant conditions” under Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (Cth) – whether proposed discovery disproportionate, burdensome or oppressive
23 Sep 2026 |  COLLIER J


Migration
Deyanti v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2026] FCAFC 126
MIGRATION – citizenship – where appellant was found abandoned in Australia as a child and there is proof that she was born in Indonesia – where Australian Citizenship Act 1948, s 5(3)(b) deemed a person found in Australia to have been born in Australia “unless and until the contrary is proved” – whether “unless and until the contrary is proved” qualifies the person’s entitlement to nationality of a country other than Australia – appeal dismissed
23 Sep 2026 |  BANKS-SMITH, STEWART AND YOUNAN JJ


Representative Proceedings
Burt v University of Sydney [2026] FCAFC 129
REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDINGS – representative proceeding pursuant to pt IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) – where domestic students of the first respondent (the “University”) who had been accepted as candidates for higher degrees by research (“HDRs”) received certain Commonwealth scholarships – whether contractual arrangements such that engagement was not one of University and student but one of employer and employee – whether the University contravened s 50 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) by failing to pay minimum entitlements under enterprise agreements that covered the University and its employees – features of contract of service – whether arrangements featured the requisite mutuality of obligation – significance of control – where the primary judge concluded that the relationship between the appellant and the University was not one of employment – appeal dismissed
23 Sep 2026 |  WIGNEY, SNADEN AND SHARIFF JJ


Practice and Procedure
MJZP v Director-General of Security [2026] FCAFC 127
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – preliminary question – where the applicant contended that consideration by the Court of certain documents and information that was withheld from the applicant for national security reasons (certificated materials) would be unfair in an adversarial system absent the adoption of specified procedural fairness mechanisms – where the applicant proposed an order that the respondents provide the “gist” of the certificated materials – where the applicant proposed that conditions be imposed on the tender of certificated materials or that the certificated materials be excluded – where neither party sought to tender the certificated materials – whether material before the (then) Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) is before the Court on the appeal by operation of s 46 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) (AAT Act) or only upon tender ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – appeal from a decision of the Tribunal to affirm an adverse security assessment (ASA) furnished under the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 (Cth) – where the ASA recommended the Minister for Home Affairs (the Minister) give a direction under s 315A of the Telecommunications Act 1997 (Cth) (Telecommunications Act) requiring the applicant cease supplying carriage services in Australia – where the Minister issued four written certificates (the certificates) under ss 39A(8) and 39B(2) of the AAT Act in relation to the certificated materials – where the Tribunal proceeding was conducted partly in closed session without the applicant and its legal representatives who were also not permitted access to the certificated materials ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – validity of the certificates –whether the decisions to issue the certificates were legally unreasonable because the Minister did not form the state of satisfaction required by s 39B(2) on a correct understanding of the law on the material available –whether the Minister misconstrued the statutory task by treating the “public in
18 Sep 2026 |  ABRAHAM, KENNETT AND SHARIFF JJ


Practice and Procedure
Clark v Registrar of Titles (No 2) [2026] FCA 1404
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application by applicant for Registrar of Titles to give discovery – where applicant seeks injunction restraining Registrar from transferring land pursuant to mortgagee's right – where no basis demonstrated that documents sought are of any relevance – application dismissed and applicant ordered to show cause as to why the proceedings should not be dismissed
22 Sep 2026 |  COLVIN J


Was this page useful?

What did you like about it?

If you would like the Court to contact you about your website feedback enter your email address in the box below. If you need help with a Court matter, visit the Contact Us pages or go to Live Chat.

How can we make it better?

If you would like the Court to contact you about your website feedback enter your email address in the box below. If you need help with a Court matter, visit the Contact Us pages or go to Live Chat.

* This online submission is protected by captcha