CPD Series | 2026

The High Court has said: “The field of debate, causation, is one of the most difficult in the law, and one about which abstract discussion is seldom valuable for courts and those who practise in them.” Many legal practitioners focus so closely on whether a defendant’s conduct was wrong; they overlook whether the misconduct was causative of loss. Greenway’s Dinesh Ratnam and Andrew Girgis will get you thinking “so what” by taking you through some of the common mistakes and look at the role of the hypothetical counterfactual in pleading and presenting cases for misleading or deceptive conduct and the extent to which it differs from causation in other contexts.

The High Court has said: “The field of debate, causation, is one of the most difficult in the law, and one about which abstract discussion is seldom valuable for courts and those who practise in them.” Many legal practitioners focus so closely on whether a defendant’s conduct was wrong they overlook whether the misconduct was causative of loss. Greenway’s Dinesh Ratnam and Andrew Girgis will get you thinking “so what” by taking you through some of the common mistakes and look at the role of the hypothetical counterfactual in pleading and presenting cases for misleading or deceptive conduct and the extent to which it differs from causation in other contexts.

This seminar addresses aspects of the coronial jurisdiction. It outlines various facets of the jurisdiction including the purpose of coronial proceedings, the distinction between manner of death and cause of death, the privilege against self-incrimination, apologies and family statements, and witness preparation.

This seminar addresses aspects of the coronial jurisdiction.  It outlines various facets of the jurisdiction including the purpose of coronial proceedings, the distinction between manner of death and cause of death, the privilege against self-incrimination, apologies and family statements, and witness preparation.

Colin Magee and Justin Pen will summarise recent developments regarding the prosecution of “reckless conduct” offences under s 31 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW), including by reference to cognate legislation in cognate jurisdictions – namely, whether recklessness requires proof that a defendant foresaw the possibility, rather than a probability, of a risk to health and safety. They will also review the proposed changes to s 31, and the proposed insertion of a new s30A “industrial manslaughter” offence, expressed in the Model Work Health and Safety Legislation Amendment (Offences and Penalties) 2023 (Cth).

We hope you can join us.

Recent decisions interpreting the statutory duty of care imposed by section 37 of the Design and Building Practitioner’s Act 2020 have made it clear that almost any person involved in the construction industry is subject to the new statutory duty of care and may be sued for defective work if they breach that duty. While this appears like a boon for plaintiffs in building and construction actions, there are strict rules that can make pleading and evidencing such a claim a difficult exercise, and care must be taken lest the cost of pleading and prosecuting this cause of action outweigh any potential benefits. Garth Campbell and Lucas Shipway will discuss the recent decisions in this area, the impacts on pleading for both plaintiffs and defendants, and also where the law in this area may be headed. We hope you can join us.

In our first segment, Frank Hicks SC and Richard Cheney SC discuss the High Court decision of Stubbings v Jams 2 concerning unconscionable conduct, the Full Federal Court decision in Minister for the Environment v Sharma about the common law duty of care on the Minister in the context of climate change, and Palmer v Premiair Aviation Maintenance a case in which Clive Palmer was ordered to pay costs on an indemnity basis. 

In our second segment, Frank is joined by Ingmar Taylor SC and Lucy Saunders to discuss the recent High Court decisions concerning the question of independent contractor v employee – CFMMEU v Personnel Contracting and ZG Operations v Jamsek. 

Medium neutral citations of the cases discussed are: 

• Stubbings v Jams 2 Pty Ltd [2022] HCA 6

In this episode of Law Talking, Ian Roberts and Frank Hicks look at recent High Court and NSW Court of Appeal decisions on varied topics such as Clive Palmer, academic freedom, casual workers, vaccination orders, and repudiation and causation in damages claims.

Leah Reid joins Frank to discuss vaccination issues in the context of family law and the many questions that can arise involving children and parenting.

Lastly, we revisit a seminar that was delivered earlier this year on how to plead a claim for breach of the statutory duty under s.37 of the Design Building Practitioners Act 2020, following the decision in Strata Plan 87060 v Loulach Developments.

In this episode, Frank Hicks looks at two recent UK decisions concerning liquidated damages and delay.  What is the accrued right to liquidated damages when works are terminated before completion and can a clause which is invalid as a penalty still be operable as a cap? 

In our second segment, Frank is joined by Richard Cheney and Adele Carr to discuss two important High Court decisions of recent times.  Price v Spoor considers the statutory limitations on liability and agreements which may make those provisions unenforceable.  Libertyworks Inc v The Commonwealth of Australia concerns the implied right of political communication and the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme Act 2018 (Cth) ("the FITS Act"), which seeks to ensure greater transparency with respect to potential foreign influence in the effective functioning and accountability of Australian government institutions. 

Lastly, our Front of House team discusses life in Chambers in these strangest of times!

Intro and end music: This Right Here by Till

Transition sounds: The Improv and Extraordinaire by DJ Quads

Produced by Greenway Chambers

On this episode of Law Talking with Greenway Chambers, Frank Hicks and Ian Roberts look at current events, with a focus on the recent decision of the Federal Court where it was held that a common law duty of care was owed by the Commonwealth Environment Minister to the children of Australia with respect to climate change and approval of the extension of a coal mine.  They also look at the conclusion of the defamation proceedings brought by Christian Porter against the ABC, and Clive Palmer appeals his loss to Twisted Sister over copyright.    

Frank is then joined by Declan Byrne and Faheem Anwar to discuss the upcoming CPD on the new Regulations to the Design Building Practitioners Act and how to plead a claim for breach of the statutory duty of care under section of that Act for defects causing economic loss.  

Available to listen on Apple.

Intro and end music: This Right Here by Till