Download federal courts

Introductory & Contract Law
Week 3
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Sources of Law
Parliament
The Courts
Federal
State
Trade Practices
Act
Fair Trading Act
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Equity
Promissory
estoppel
Unconscionable
Conduct
Common Law
Contract Law
Pecking Order
1. Legislation
2. Regulation
3. Equity
4. Common Law
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Courts
 The hierarchy of courts
 Role of the High Court
 Original Jurisdiction
 Appellate jurisdiction
 Conferred jurisdiction
 Federal Courts
 State Courts
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Jurisdiction
 Subject Matter




Criminal
Civil
Administrative
Appeal
 Powers
 Length of jail sentences
 Monetary limits
 Injunctions & other remedies
 Geographical limits
 Residence of parties
 Where claim arose
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Privy Council
Appeals Abolished
STATE COURTS
FEDERAL COURTS
Federal Court
Family Court
Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
District Court
Federal Magistrates Service
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Magistrates Court
Often Combined
High Court
Stare Decisis
 Where a court has decided a case in a particular way,
then subsequent cases involving similar facts should
be decided in the same way
 Precedent
 Binding - Courts must follow a decision of a higher court in
the same hierarchy
 Persuasive - Courts will consider decisions of other courts
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Precedent
 Two types
 Binding
 Persuasive
 Binding
 Must be followed and applied
 Persuasive
 Not binding.
 Considered by the Court and may be followed
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Precedent (Cont.)
 Persuasiveness depends on
 quality of decision
 jurisdiction of the court that gave the decision
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Rules of Precedent
 Lower courts must follow decisions of higher courts in
the same hierarchy
 A judge does not have to follow decisions of Judges
at the same level. However, will be persuasive.
 Judge does not have to follow decisions of higher
court in a different hierarchy although they will be
persuasive
 Highest court in hierarchy can overrule its previous
decisions
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
The Court’s Decision (Cont.)
 Ratio Decidendi
 Consists of those parts of the decision that were
necessary to decide that particular case
 Obiter Dictum
 Statements made by Judge that are not necessary
to decide the case
 Remarks in passing
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Applying Ratio Decidendi
 Can be difficult to discern
 Commentators often dispute what is decisions Ration
Decidendi
 Can be widened or narrowed by later decisions
 Facts are rarely exactly the same
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Example - Donoghue v Stevenson




A drink manufacturer has a duty to persons who might drink their
product to take care that the bottle does not contain dead snails
A person has a duty to act in such a way that his or her conduct does
not cause harm to others.
A manufacturer of food, drinks or medicines whose products are
packaged in such a way that inspection of the product is not possible,
has a duty to take reasonable care that the product does not contain a
defect that will cause harm to the ultimate consumer.
People must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions that they
could reasonably foresee as likely to injure persons who have a
reasonable proximity to the wrongdoer.
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Citing Cases – Volumes by Number
 Smith v Jones (2001) 145 CLR 203, 207
 Name of parties
 Year of publication
 Volume number
 Report name
 First page of judgment
 Page on which specific passage appears
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Citing Cases – Volumes by Year
 Smith v Jones [1945] 2 All ER 203, 207
 Name of Parties
 Year of Volume
 Volume number if more than one volume in a year
 Report name
 Page on which specific passage appears
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Citing Cases – Medium Neutral
 Smith v Jones (2001) HCA 203, [20]
 Name of Parties
 Year of decision
 Court designator
 Judgment number
 Paragraph number
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
The English Legal System
 Adversarial System
 Civil
 Plaintiff
 Defendant
 Criminal
 The Crown
 The Accused
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
The English Legal System
 Adversarial System (cont.)
 Decision makers
 Jury
 Judge
 Lawyers
 Solicitors
 Barristers
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Proving a Claim
Standard of Proof
 Civil Cases
 Balance of Probabilities
 Criminal Cases
 Beyond Reasonable Doubt
Burden of Proof
 Civil Cases - Plaintiff
 Criminal Cases - Prosecution
 Presumptions
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Criminal Cases
 Minor




Complaint
Summary trial by magistrate
Conviction
Sentence
 Serious






Information
Committal hearing
Indictment
Trial by judge and jury
Conviction
Sentence
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Civil Cases








Summons
Pleadings
Discovery of documents
Pre-trial hearings
Settlement conferences
Trial
Judgement
Orders
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Proving a Claim (cont.)
 Affidavit
 Subpoena
 Witnesses
 Oral evidence
 Documents
 Official records
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Appeals
 A party who disputes a court’s decision can appeal to a
“higher” court
 Usually limited to legal arguments
 Adversarial
 Appellant
 Respondent
 Can keep appealing to the next higher court if there is
one
 Hierarchy of Courts
Copyright Guy Harley 2004
Problem
For each case:






Give the citation for the case
In what court was the case heard?
Name the judge(s) and explain their titles
Name the parties and give their role in the case
Name the solicitors and who they represented
Name a case cited in the judgement. Was it persuasive
or binding?
 What was the ratio decidendi of the case?
 Was there an obiter dicta? If so, what was it.
Copyright Guy Harley 2004