Latest News
View AllUpcoming Seminars
View AllNo seminars are currently available
Latest Publications
View AllVanderstock v Victoria: Free Trade and Federalism (2024) 35 (1) Federal Law Review Law Review 13-23
1-5-24 / Sarah Spottiswood — Appellate, Judicial Review & Administrative, Tax
In Vanderstock v Victoria (2023) 98 ALJR 208, a 4-3 majority of the High Court held that a tax imposed by Victoria on the use of electric and hybrid vehicles was invalid. The majority held that the tax was a "duty of excise" which, under section 90 of the 'Constitution',…
The Use and Limits of Statutory Purpose in the Interpretation of Legislation
27-11-23 / Roger Traves KC — Appellate, Banking, Building & Construction, Commercial Equity, Contract, Corporations, Inquiries & Coronial Inquests, Insurance, Judicial Review & Administrative, Land Law & Property, Native Title & Cultural Heritage, Planning & Environment, Professional Discipline & Regulatory, Professional Negligence, Resources & Energy, Sport, Succession, Tax
In his article The Use and Limits of Statutory Purpose in the Interpretation of Legislation, Roger Traves KC considers a framework of approach to statutory construction and the use and limits of statutory purpose. Who should read? Advisory and litigation lawyers across all practice areas. What does the…
Taking Stock of Vanderstock: Section 90, Electric Vehicles and the Future of State Taxes on Goods
9-11-23 / Sarah Spottiswood, Michael Maynard — Judicial Review & Administrative, Tax
In the decision Vanderstock v Victoria [2023] HCA 30, the High Court held by a narrow 4:3 majority that a tax imposed by Victoria on the use of electrical and hybrid vehicles (EVs) was invalid. The decision is significant because the majority reopened and overruled previous High Court authority to reach…
Recent Cases
View AllDirector, Professional Services Review v Yoong (No 2) [2025] FCAFC 106
15-8-25 / Sarah Spottiswood, Stewart Webster KC — Appellate, Human Rights & Discrimination, Judicial Review & Administrative
Sarah Spottiswood appeared for the Appellant, instructed by Australian Government Solicitor. Stewart Webster KC represented the respondent, instructed by MinterEllison.
Santos v Fluor [2025] QSC 184
8-8-25 / Claire Schneider, Jason Mitchenson — Building & Construction, Contract, Judicial Review & Administrative
Claire Schneider and Jason Mitchenson (led by P O'Shea KC, J Rowland KC, D Piggott KC, A Stumer KC and leading J Menzies) appeared for the plaintiff, instructed by Corrs Chambers Westgarth. The proceeding concerned the validity of a referees’ report that examined contractual claims made by the plaintiff against…
Director, Professional Services Review v Yoong [2025] FCAFC 95
25-7-25 / Michael Hodge KC, Stewart Webster KC — Judicial Review & Administrative
Michael Hodge KC and Stewart Webster KC represented the respondent, instructed by MinterEllison. The central question in the appeal concerned the validity of a notice issued by the appellant under s 89B of the Health Insurance Act 1973 (Cth) (HI Act) that required the respondent to produce “complete clinical records” in…
