Woodman v Vic

[2023] VSCA 169

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Interlocutory injunctions
3. › Refusal of interlocutory injunction
4. › Appellate review of discretionary decision
5. › Whether House v The King error established
6. › Whether arguable case shown
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Procedural fairness
3. › Public hearing by anti-corruption commission
4. › Whether conducting public hearing denied procedural fairness
5. › Whether statutory preconditions for public hearing communicated to applicant
6. › Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission Act 2011 (Vic), s 117
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Estoppel
3. › Anshun estoppel
4. › Whether applicant acted unreasonably in failing to raise issue in earlier proceeding
5. › Successive proceedings concerning substantially the same subject matter and directed to the same relief
6. › Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Ltd (1981) 147 CLR 589
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Delay
3. › Judicial review of public power
4. › Whether delay justified refusal of interlocutory relief
5. › No explanation for failure to raise challenge at time of examination or in earlier proceeding
6. › Overlap with abuse of process doctrine

Quick Take

IBAC is not required to expressly state that the statutory preconditions for a public examination under s 117 of the IBAC Act are satisfied; it is sufficient that the applicant is informed of the statutory basis and given the opportunity to make submissions. Challenges to the validity of a public examination must be raised at the earliest opportunity, and failure to do so in earlier proceedings concerning substantially the same subject matter will likely give rise to Anshun estoppel. Significant unexplained delay in challenging the exercise of public power will weigh heavily against the grant of interlocutory relief.