Cases - Level Twenty Seven Chambers

Top

All Cases

Pat Nolan Butchery Pty Ltd & Ors v Department of Transport and Main Roads [2026] QLC 13

19-8-26 / Rob Anderson KC, John Ware — Land Law & Property

Rob Anderson KC and John Ware appeared for the applicants. This proceeding concerned an application to dismiss a compensation claim arising from the resumption of land, where the applicants asserted that a licence to use a flood evacuation track constituted an interest in land giving rise to compensation rights under…

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v D’Arro (No 2) [2026] QSC 177

22-7-26 / Rob Anderson KC — Tax

Rob Anderson KC (leading C Matthews) represented the defendant, instructed by Robinson Locke Litigation Lawyers. This judgement follows orders made on 8 June 2026 dismissing the plaintiff’s application for summary judgement and inviting further submission on the issue of costs. Each party sought their costs of the application on the…

Garlick v KALX Capital Securities Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 808

24-6-26 / Rob Anderson KC — Corporate Insolvency & Bankruptcy, Judicial Review & Administrative

Rob Anderson KC appeared on behalf of the respondent, instructed by Watson Webb. In summary, the applicant sought review of a Judicial Registrar’s refusal to set aside a bankruptcy notice, arguing that he had a cross-demand exceeding the judgment debt because money had been paid into the Supreme Court in…

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v D’Arro [2026] QSC 109

8-6-26 / Rob Anderson KC — Tax

Rob Anderson KC leading C Matthews represented the respondent, instructed by Robinson Locke Litigation Lawyers. This case concerned an application brought by the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation seeking summary judgment against the respondent pursuant to r 292 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld). The Deputy Commissioner argued that…

Philip Usher Constructions Pty Ltd v Cross River Rail Delivery Authority & Anor [2026] QLAC 1

13-4-26 / Rob Anderson KC — Land Law & Property

Rob Anderson KC (leading JS Brien) represented the first respondent, instructed by Ashurst. The appellant appealed a decision of the Land Court that held they did not have a right to compensation for the resumption of specified land for the Cross River Rail. The appellant sought to set aside the…

Cases — Rob Anderson KC