Glossary
Alphabetical Terms
A B C D E G I J L M N O P Q R S T U V W


T

Gelagotis v Esso Australia Pty Ltd [2018] FWCFB 6092 - provides that the test for repudiation is whether the conduct of the employee is such as to convey to a reasonable person, in the position of the employer, renunciation either of the contract as a whole or of a fundamental obligation under it.  Koompahtoo Local Aboriginal Land Council v Sanpine Pty Ltd [2007] HCA 61; (2007) 233 CLR 115 - provided that the test is whether the conduct of one party is such as to convey to a reasonable person, in the situation of the other party, renunciation either of the contract as a whole or of a fundamental obligation under it. 
General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (‘General Steel’) [1964] HCA 69; (1964) 112 CLR 125 - provides that the test of whether the respondent to the application for summary judgment has a ‘real’ as opposed to a ‘fanciful’ chance of success is to be applied by reference to its own language and without paraphrase or comparison with the ‘hopeless’ or ‘bound to fail test’. 
Lovell v Penkin (a bankrupt) [2008] FCA 637; 101 ALD 335 - where the tort claim arises because of the existence of—“by reason of”—the retainer.   Jack v Kipping [1882] UKLawRpKQB 14; (1882) 9 QBD 113 - held that framing a claim as a claim in tort does not conclude the question whether the demand arises by reason of a contract or promise.   Hawkins v Clayton (1988) 164 CLR 539 - held that the scope of the duty in tort will usually be set by the terms of the retainer (which indicates the nature of the relationship that gives rise to the tortious duty of care).
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Australian Safeway Stores Pty Ltd [1997] FCA 450; (1997) 145 ALR 36 - provides that application of the totality principle should ensure that, overall, a sentence or penalty is appropriate and that the sum of the penalties imposed for several contraventions does not result in the total of the penalties exceeding what is proper having regard to the totality of the contravening conduct.
Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs v QAAH of 2004 [2006] HCA 53 -  provides that although the text of the treaty is the starting point and has primacy in the interpretation process, it is mandatory "that courts look to the context, object and purpose of treaty provisions as well as the text ... consistent with the general principle that international instruments should be interpreted in a more liberal manner than would be adopted if the court was required to construe exclusively domestic legislation"


U

Lynn v State of New South Wales (2016) 91 NSWLR 636; [2016] NSWCA 57 - provides that the phrase "unacceptable risk" should be given its everyday meaning within its context and having regard to the objects of the Act. 
DPP v Bourke [2020] VSC 130 - provides that the inherent utilitarian value of a guilty plea is greater during the pandemic.


V

NAAV v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCAFC 228, 123 FCR 298 - provides that in determining whether a decision made in purported exercise of a statutory power is invalid for exceeding that power, it is necessary to consider the provision conferring the power and its constitutional and statutory setting. 


W

A reasoning or decision is Wednesbury unreasonable (or irrational) if it is so unreasonable that no reasonable person acting reasonably could have made it (Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation (1948)
SSL Certificates