All too often we are instructed to advise on contract disputes where the contract has not been administered in accordance with its terms. Parties depart from the prescribed processes in a contract for a variety of reasons including:
It can be difficult to explain to a client that, despite experiencing losses at the hands of the other party, their prospects of recovery are reduced due to the way the contract has been administered. The same works in reverse in defending a claim by the other party. It is even more challenging to explain that the client is in that position because those charged with the responsibility of making sure the contract was followed by the client, didn’t do so, whether that be due to ignorance or negligence.
Putting to one side, departure from the contract terms due to ignorance or negligence, the length of many engagements can lead to a situation where both parties recognise that the terms agreed to might not suit the parties. It can be the case that both parties’ interests are best served by adopting something different to what is prescribed in the contract. Where the circumstances the parties find themselves in mean that it is necessary and/or more convenient to do something different, there is a much better way to effect the desired change than to make something up. Whilst parties are generally clear on the necessity for formality in agreeing a change in what is being supplied or the price to be paid, a change in process or acceptable thresholds seems to attract less attention.
The recent Supreme Court of NSW decision in H&M Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd v Golden Rain Development Pty Ltd (No 4)  NSWSC 925 is a good reminder of the importance of being familiar with the agreed terms and following them in any contract.
In this case, the superintendent created something not contemplated by the contract. Whilst the legal effect of this is simple – the invention, a conditional certificate of practical completion, had no legal effect, this is clearly not what either party thought was happening, creating fertile grounds for dispute. What is clear from the outcome is that if parties are going to change an important threshold mechanism, they are best to formally amend the contract. This ameliorates the risk that a party walks back from the agreement to adopt a different approach or that there is a misunderstanding as to what is agreed.
Whilst it may seem like a formal deed of variation, especially at the end of a project, introduces undesirable cost and delay, those inconveniences are likely to be minor compared to the legal costs spent in litigation.
Hundreds of extra public, affordable homes close to Sydney CBD proposed under revised Waterloo Estate redevelopment plan
The Minns Labor Government announced on 21 August 2023 that nearly 500 extra social and affordable homes will be built close to Sydney's CBD under revised plans for the rejuvenation of one of Australia's biggest social housing estates: the Waterloo Estate (21 August 2023). Read more here.
Urgent review clears Newcastle project linked to resignation of NSW minister Tim Crakanthorp
An urgent review by the cabinet into the Broadmeadow Precinct project in Newcastle, after it was revealed the family of Mr Crakanthorp’s wife held property interests in the area, found that the undisclosed property did not impact on the decision making processes or governance relating to it. It is recommended that pause on the “precinct planning should be lifted to reduce delays and provide certainty to stakeholders and the community” (21 August 2023). Read more here.
NSW Government announces another review into Sydney Metro West project
After Premier Chris Minns was elected in March, the premier launched an independent review into the issues of the entire Sydney Metro program. A lower house committee inquiry, which is due for its first hearing in October, is in addition to that review. Transport and Infrastructure Committee Chair, Lynda Volt, stated that the Committee wants to “look at the business case and delve into why there has been a blowout in terms of the cost and the timeline for the project” (16 August 2023). Read more here.
Calls for review of NSW Future of Gas Statement
There are calls for a review of New South Wales' key gas policy after it was revealed consulting firm Ernst & Young (EY) contributed to research while working with Santos. The Future of Gas Statement renewed several petroleum exploration licences in NSW’s north-west to support the future of the Narrabri Gas project which stated the Santos project would account for about half of the state’s gas needs across its 25-year lifespan (9 August 2023). Read more here.
Consultation now open for proposed safety improvements on the Princes Highway in Ulladulla
The community is invited to have their say on proposed traffic light installation at the Princes Highway and South Street intersection in Ulladulla until 4 September 2023. Transport for NSW Acting Regional Director Mr James said they have “heard the concerns of the local community about how unsafe the intersection is… [i]n response to these concerns, Transport NSW proposes to install traffic lights” (21 August 2023). Read more here.
NSW Department of Planning and Environment split to elevate climate and housing
Effective from 1 January 2024, the NSW Department of Planning and Environment will be split into two departments: the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water and the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure. This is part of the second machinery of government change for the state’s public service since Labor got into power. The new departments will be joined by the Office of Energy and Climate Change which is currently in Treasury (18 August 2023). Read more here.
Further extension granted to NSW Special Commission for Inquiry into LGBTIQ hate crimes
The NSW Government has provided a final extension to the reporting date for the Special Commission of Inquiry into LGBTIQ hate crimes to 15 December 2023. This will ensure that victims and families receive closure (16 August 2023). Read more here. Public Hearing 9 will be present on 22 and 24 August 2022 with the deaths of Crispin Dye and William Allen to be the subject of these proceedings. Read more on Public Hearing 9 here.
Independent Panel gets to work on NSW Government’s landmark gaming reforms
The NSW Government has welcomed the first meeting of the Independent Panel on Gaming Reform. The Independent Panel has considered elements of the upcoming cashless gaming trial, as well as matters which will inform its recommendations to the NSW Government on a gaming reform implementation roadmap (15 August 2023). Read more here.
NSW Government releases first Bus Industry Taskforce Report
The NSW Government has released the first report into the industry, giving in-principle support to seven key recommendations made by the Bus Industry Taskforce (14 August 2023). View the media release here. Read more of the Report here.
State-wide public consultation begins on Vocational Education and Training Review to re-skill NSW
A comprehensive review of the state’s vocational education and training (VET) commenced on 11 August 2023 with the launch of public consultation around the state. The Review will address how to put TAFE at the heart of the NSW VET system as well as identify strengths, gaps and opportunities for improvement in skills development and training (11 August 2023). View the media release here. View the Review here.
AAT Bulletin Issue No.16/2023
The AAT Bulletin is a fortnightly publication containing information about recently published decisions and appeals against decisions in the AAT’s General, Freedom of Information, National Disability Insurance Scheme, Security, Small Business Taxation, Taxation & Commercial and Veterans’ Appeals Divisions Cases (14 August 2023). Read more here.
Reissued Practice Note SC WQ 12 – Real Property List
The Chief Justice reissued this Practice Note on 17 August 2023, commencing on 18 August 2023. The revised Practice Note updates requirements for submitting consent orders, provides procedure for remote appearances and updates the procedures for interlocutory applications (17 August 2023). Read more here.
High Court Bulletin  HCAB 06
The High Court Bulletin is a record of recent High Court of Australia cases: decided, reserved for judgment, awaiting hearing in the Court’s original jurisdiction, granted special leave to appeal, refused special leave to appeal and not proceeding or vacated (11 August 2023). Read more here.
Jones v Commissioner for Fair Trading, Department of Finance, Services and Innovation  NSWCATOD 142
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Administrative Review – Home Building Act 1989 – application for contractor licence endorsed to be equivalent to a supervisor certificate – application of Instrument issued by the respondent Commissioner – whether the Tribunal is satisfied the applicant has the necessary breadth of experience – need for third party verification of experience.
Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW); Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW); Home Building Act 1989 (NSW); Home Building Regulation 2014 (NSW).
Singh v Commissioner for Fair Trading  NSWCATOD 123
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Home building – Application for individual contractor licence – application of Instrument – experience requirements – ‘wide range of building construction work’.
Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997; Home Building Act 1989; Licensing and Registration (Uniform Procedures) Act 2002.
Styles v Department of Planning and Environment  NSWCATAD 220
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – access to government information – decision of the agency that access application was not a valid application.
Administrative Arrangement (Second Perrottet Ministry – Transitional) Order 2021; Administrative Arrangements (Administrative Changes – Public Service agencies) Order 2019; Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997; Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013; Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009; Local Government Act 1993.
Aerotropolis Pty Ltd v Secretary, Department of Planning and Environment  NSWCCA 195
CRIME – appeal pursuant to s 5F of the Criminal Appeal Act in respect of an interlocutory decision of the Land and Environment Court – whether commencement of proceedings were time barred – calculation of limitation periods – construction of s 13.4(2) of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (‘BC Act’) and s 190(1)(b) of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (‘NPW Act’) – whether s 36 of the Interpretation Act 1987 excluded by s 13.4(4) of the BC Act and s 190(4) of the NPW Act.
Acts Interpretation Act 1931 (Tas) s 29(3); Acts Interpretation Act 1954-1977 (Qld) s 38; Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (NSW) ss 1.3, 2.2, 2.4, 13.4; Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW); Companies (Western Australia) Code, ss 229, 570; Corporations Law, s 1316; County Court Act 1958 (Vic) s 74(2)(a); Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) s 5F; Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) s 179(1); Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) ss 127(5), 127(5A); Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) s 128; Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW) ss 5(2), 36; Justices Act 1959 (Tas) s 26(1); Legal Profession Uniform Application Act 2014 (NSW) s 5(1); Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld) s 11; Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 476, 478; National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NSW) ss 2A, 118A, 118D, 190; Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW) s 64; Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005 cll 5, 6; Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) ss 74N(4), 81G(4); Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995 (Qld) s 55.
Gregg v Burrowes & Ords (trading as PricewaterhouseCoopers)  NSWSC 895
CONTRACTS – PARTNERSHIP – where the plaintiff is a partner in an accountancy firm – where the Partnership Agreement contains a provision giving the Board of Partners, by final and binding determination, power to require a Partner to retire from the partnership – where the power must not be exercised unless the Partner has acted in a manner which is materially inconsistent with the standard of conduct expected of a Partner, or has acted in a manner which may damage the reputation of the firm – where the Partnership Agreement stipulates a procedure that must be followed in respect of a determination which requires Management to make a Recommendation to the Board of Partners that the Partner be required to retire, which Recommendation must specify Management’s reasons for forming its view and making the Recommendation – where Management purported to make a Recommendation to the Board of Partners that the plaintiff should be required to retire as a Partner – whether the Recommendation satisfies the requirements of the Partnership Agreement to specify Management’s reasons for forming its view and making the Recommendation – HELD – it does not.
State of New South Wales v Carver (No 2)  NSWSC 972
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where principal proceedings were an action by the Crown for possession of land occupied by the defendant – where Summons correctly described the land but the orders ultimately made, by error, did not contain a full description of the land – HELD – orders corrected under the slip rule.
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).
Breitkopf v Industrial Relations Secretary, on behalf of the Department of Communities and Justice (Corrective Services NSW)  NSWIRComm 1079
Employment Law – hearing de novo – disciplinary action –whether misconduct occurred.
Government Sector Employment Act 2013 (NSW); Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW).
FJX v TAFE NSW  NSWCATAD 215
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – privacy – whether workers compensation certificate of capacity for work is ‘personal information’ – whether respondent’s team leader used workers compensation certificate of capacity to determine applicant’s suitability for employment as acting head teacher – whether breach of information privacy principle or health privacy principle – whether respondent authorised such breach.
Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998.
4C, 14D, 14E, 14F.
State of New South Wales v Spedding  NSWCA 180
TORTS – malicious prosecution – institution of proceedings – identification of prosecutors – distinction between institution and maintenance of proceedings – whether police officers can be prosecutors for the purposes of the tort after the Director of Public Prosecutions has taken over carriage of the prosecution – whether police officers maintained the prosecution after the Director of Public Prosecutions took over the proceeding.
TORTS – malicious prosecution – absence of reasonable and probable cause – where proceedings commenced for dominant purpose of advancing police investigation of unrelated criminal matter – where many basic investigative tasks not completed prior to arrest and charging – where police had exculpatory material available to them which had not been read when criminal proceedings were instituted – whether actual knowledge of exculpatory material is required to demonstrate an absence of reasonable and probable cause.
TORTS – malicious prosecution – malice – what constitutes – where proceedings commenced for dominant purpose of advancing police investigation of unrelated criminal matter – whether sufficient to demonstrate malice – whether actual knowledge of exculpatory material is required to demonstrate malice – where improper purpose of Police was not disclosed to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions – whether malice can be found on part of the Office of Director of Public Prosecutions.
TORTS – collateral abuse of process – who may commit – where one police officer was listed as the prosecutor on the Court Attendance Notice – whether the tort can be committed by a police officer who is not a party to the criminal proceeding – whether this is material where State is vicariously liable for all police officers involved.
TORTS – collateral abuse of process – what constitutes – where it is accepted that the institution of criminal proceedings to advance an unrelated investigation is not a proper purpose – whether functions of police are confined to arrest, investigation and commencement of criminal proceedings – whether police nonetheless liable due to commencement of proceedings to advance an unrelated police investigation.
TORTS – misfeasance in public office – what constitutes – whether maintenance of criminal proceeding can be an exercise in public power.
TORTS – Malicious prosecution – damage – damage to plaintiff’s reputation – where the respondent was already known as a suspect in unrelated investigation – where charges laid in order to advance that unrelated investigation – whether damage to reputation was caused by leaking of the respondent’s name as a suspect as opposed to by malicious prosecution – whether distinction can be drawn between the two causes.
Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), ss 3B, 16, 17; Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (NSW), ss 2, 3; Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61E(1A), 66A; Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW); Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 47, 48, 50; Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1986 (NSW), ss 9, 13, 15A; Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW), s 99.
State of New South Wales v Colb (Final)  NSWSC 969
HIGH RISK OFFENDER – application for extended supervision order – dispute about scheduling conditions – conditions agreed upon – extended supervision order imposed.
Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006.
El-Zaghir v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force  NSWCATAD 216
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW – firearms – genuine reason – failure to comply with participation requirements – failure to notify of change of particulars – fit and proper person – public interest.
Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997; Firearms Act 1996; Firearms Regulation 2017.
Blacktown City Council v Aria  NSWLEC 83
CIVIL ENFORCEMENT – importation and placement of 15,000 cubic metres of asbestos‑contaminated waste ‑ Applicant seeks order for removal and remediation – Respondent seeks six‑month adjournment to obtain development consent – development prohibited – adjournment refused – site mapped as high‑risk flood‑prone land – high risk to the environment – no discretionary basis to refuse proposed remediation order – declaration appropriate to be made – remediation orders made.
CIVIL ENFORCEMENT – storage of more than 150 vehicles on flood‑prone land – activity prohibited – Applicant seeks order requiring removal of vehicles – Respondent seeks six‑month adjournment to obtain development consent – no functional residence on the land – vehicle storage activities incapable of characterisation as either “home occupation” or “home industry” even if there was a functional and occupied residence on the land – no basis upon which vehicle storage activities could be approved – consent not possible – storage of vehicles on flood‑prone land risks downstream water pollution – high risk to the environment – appropriate to order the removal of vehicles – Applicant accepts that up to nine vehicles could be stored on the land for repair or restoration – no reason to refuse removal order – appropriate to order removal of vehicles – removal order made.
COSTS – applicant seeks costs of proceedings – costs conventionally follow the event – no disentitling conduct by Applicant ‑ Respondent ordered to pay Applicant's costs as agreed or assessed.
Larsen & Larsen v Department of Planning & Environment  NSWCATAD 222
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – access to government information – decision of the agency that it did not hold the information sought – whether the search efforts of the agency were reasonable in the circumstances.
Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW); Crown Land Management Act 2016 (NSW); Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW); State Records Act 1998 (NSW).
Natural Grass at Norman Griffiths Inc v Ku-ring-gai Council  NSWLEC 84
JUDICIAL REVIEW – council determination to construct synthetic grass playing field and stormwater mitigation – s 5.5 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EP&A Act) – no failure of duty to inquire under s 5.5 – admissibility of expert evidence – construction of s 171A(4) of Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW) – s 5.7 of EP&A Act – whether activity will significantly affect the environment – no failure to comply with s 5.7 – whether delegation duly exercised in approving the activity – summons dismissed
Associations Incorporation Act 2009 (NSW); Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (NSW); Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW); Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW); Local Government Act 1993 (NSW); Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW).
Wojciechowska v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice; Wojciechowska v Registrar, Civil and Administrative Tribunal  NSWCA 191
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – Federal jurisdiction – diversity jurisdiction – dispute between a State and a resident of another State – Jurisdiction of NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal – proceedings were of a kind falling within ss 75(iv) of the Constitution – Nature of the Burns v Corbett restriction.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – Federal jurisdiction – Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW) – Reviewable decisions – whether Tribunal exercising judicial power – where reviewable decisions involve governmental administration – where administrative schemes involve legal criteria – where Tribunal is not enforcing pre-existing, distinct legal rights – where Tribunal bears features characteristic of administrative tribunals in Australia – where Tribunal’s task is to undertake merits review – where tribunal is exercising non-judicial power – Burns v Corbett restriction does not apply – powers may be validly exercised by the Tribunal in proceedings which, otherwise, would fall within federal jurisdiction.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – Federal jurisdiction – Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW) – where context of the Act for government record-keeping is administrative – damages sought under s 55(2)(a) of the Act – damages is a remedy characteristically and historically awarded by courts – where the Tribunal is making orders directed to the agency, rather than in lieu of the agency’s own decision – where order made under s 55(2)(a) is to be certified under s 78(1) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) – where the decision of an administrative body is given the effect of a decision of a court – where exercise of judicial power if and when such an order is sought – no occasion to read down or sever s 78 – Burns v Corbett restriction applies.
Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth); Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW), ss 7-9, 63, 64, 65, 66; Ch 3; Pts 2, 3; Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW); Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), ss 13, 16, 17, 27(1)(a), 28, 32, 33, 34B(1), 34B(2), 38, 48, 52, 54, 72, 73, 75 ,77, 78, 80, 81, 83(1); Pt 3A; Sch 3 cl 3(1)(a), cl 9(1); Commonwealth Constitution, ss 71, 75, 76, 77; Freedom of Information Act 1989 (NSW), s 53; Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW), ss 3, 4, 9,12-15, 41(1), 51, 51A, 54, 57, 58, 59(1)(d), 59(1)(e), 60(1)(b), 60(3), 64-71, 72, 80, 84(1), 100, 102, 106(1), 110-112, 127; Pts 2, 4, 5; Sch 1 cl 1, 2, 4, 5; Sch 4 cl 10; Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW), s 31; Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 39; Ombudsman Act 1974 (NSW), ss 26(2)(d1), 26A; Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW), ss 8-14, 16-18, 20(2)(a), 21, 29, 30, 31, 32, 38, 39, 49, 50, 52, 53, 55, 63, 66, 69; Pts 3, 4; Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) ss 48, 69.
Venues NSW v Kane  NSWCA 192
NEGLIGENCE – occupier’s liability – plaintiff slipped while descending stepped aisle at outdoor stadium – whether reasonable occupier would have installed a handrail – identification of risk of harm – significance of obviousness of risk – no evidence of other persons slipping on stepped aisle – stadium certified as compliant with Building Code of Australia – appeal allowed and judgment for defendant entered.
Civil Liability Act 2001 (NSW), ss 5B, 5C; District Court Act 1973 (NSW), s 127(2)(c); Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (NSW), cl 154; Sporting Venues Authorities Act 2008 (NSW), s 12, Sch 1, Sch 5; Sporting Venues Authorities Amendment (Venues NSW) Act 2011 (NSW); Sporting Venues Authorities Amendment (Venues NSW) Act 2020 (NSW); Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 75A; Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 51.14(1)(b).
Application of NSW Trustee and Guardian  NSWSC 966
EQUITY – trusts and trustees – application for judicial advice pursuant to s 63 of the Trustee Act 1925 (NSW) – practice and procedure in judicial advice proceedings – nature of and principles governing judicial advice – judicial advice on whether NSW Trustee and Guardian is justified in selling property part of the deceased’s estate – whether the Court should decline, in its discretion, to give the advice sought – whether advice in best interests of trust estate.
Trustee Act 1925 (NSW) s 63.
Abbas v Commissioner of NSW Police  NSWSC 946
CRIMINAL LAW – application for return of property seized pursuant to warrant – where electronic devices seized from victim of suspected attempted murder – where victim practises as a solicitor relying upon the use of the devices to store and share data in the conduct of his practice – where police retrieved data by download – where devices possibly contain evidence of commission of a crime – whether return of property should be ordered.
Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 ss 95, 218, 219.
Winter v University of Technology, Sydney  NSWCATAD 223
HUMAN RIGHTS – discrimination – on the ground of a person’s disability – direct discrimination – education.
Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.
Murray v State of New South Wales  NSWSC 991
CIVIL PROCEDURE – plaintiff sought leave to commence proceedings as a person in custody whilst convicted of a serious indictable offence – application supported by expert evidence
Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW) ss 4, 5, 7
Abdul-Rahman v Canterbury-Bankstown Council  NSWLEC 1463
BUILDING INFORMATION CERTIFICATE AND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – gazebo building for patron dining at a restaurant – no onsite car parking – traffic impacts – whether development consent is required for the use of the whole of the site as the Complying Development Certificate authorising the existing restaurant cannot authorise more than 50 seats – whether the Building Information Certificate application is too narrow and would not remedy all unauthorised works at the site – whether the use, capacity and environmental effects of the proposal are uncertain – whether the premises satisfies the requirements of the Building Code of Australia.
Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 2012; Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 8.7, 8.15, 8.25, Pt 6; Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 34.
Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Religious Vilification) Act 2023 (No 15) (NSW) – assent 11 August 2023
State Insurance and Care Governance Amendment (CNSW Board) Act 2023 (No 16) (NSW) – assent 11 August 2023
Environmental planning instruments
Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 (Amendment No 35) – published LW 18 August 2023
Parramatta Local Environment Plan 2023 (Amendment No 2) – published LW 18 August 2023
State Environmental Planning Policy Amendment (Agritourism) 2023 – published LW 18 August 2023
Bills introduced by Government
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Amendment (Appointed Persons) Bill 2023 – introduced LA 2 August 2023
Electoral Funding Amendment Bill 2023 – Introduced LC 3 August 2023
ICAC and LECC Legislation Amendment Bill 2023 – Introduced LC 3 August 2023
Revenue, Fines and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2023– introduced LA 1 August 2023
Crimes Amendment (Breaking and Entering) Bill 2023– Introduced LA 3 August 2023
Forestry Amendment (Timber Harvesting Safety Zones) Bill 2023– Introduced LC 2 August 2023
Road Transport Amendment (Medicinal Cannabis) Bill 2023 – introduced LC 2 August 2023
Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 21/08/2023 – Act No. 27 of 1986 as amended
Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 18/08/02023 – Act No. 91 of 1975 as amended
Archives Act 1983 18/08/2023 – Act No. 79 of 1983 as amended
Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 17/08/2023 – Act No. 114 of 1979 as amended
Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act 1986 16/08/2023 – Act No. 101 of 1986 as amended
Intelligence Services Act 2001 16/08/2023 – Act No. 152 of 2001 as amended
Customs Tariff Act 1995 16/08/2023 – Act No. 147 of 1995 as amended
Freedom of Information Act 1982 15/08/2023 – Act No. 3 of 1982 as amended
A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Act 1992 15/08/2023 – Act No. 80 of 1999 as amended
Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 14/08/2023 – Act No. 113 of 1979 as amended
The information in this publication is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavour to provide accurate and timely information, we do not guarantee that the information in this newsletter is accurate at the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future.