Send us Fan Mail

The Petal, New Zealand edition, for the fortnight to 27 July 2026 — 71 decisions across the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and High Court, distilled: sentencing offenders who aged out of the Youth Court, the Parliament grounds protest as a tort claim, when a mortgagor’s right to redeem finally dies, and the moratorium that stops a foreign judgment at the border.

Features:

Criminal Law Desk

• Hauiti v The King [2026] NZCA 315 — the revised methodology for “aged-out” offenders applies retrospectively: first determine the likely historical Youth Court disposition (benefit of the doubt where uncertain), then whether a community-based sentence remains appropriate; remittal is the appellate course. JADE
• Goel v The King [2026] NZSC 96 — propensity evidence cross-admitted across distinct corruption offence types — whether an abstractly defined propensity is legally cognisable, and the minimum jury directions required. JADE

Public Law Desk

• G v Attorney-General [2026] NZHC 1776 — the Speaker’s precinct powers extend to reasonable indirect measures short of force against trespassed occupants; the s 9 BORA threshold stays truly egregious; misfeasance requires targeted malice with knowledge of the plaintiff; peaceful assembly validly curtailed on lawfully closed premises. JADE

Commercial Law Desk

• Rahal v ASB Bank Ltd [2026] NZHC 1874 — the equity of redemption is extinguished only when the mortgagee is bound to complete a sale; an agreement cancellable at will means the property has not yet “been sold”; the best-price duty includes clear communication about price-depressing contingencies. JADE
• Goodfellow v Du Val Group NZ Ltd (In Statutory Management and Receivership) [2026] NZHC 1951 — registering a foreign judgment is a “proceeding against the corporation” barred by the statutory-management moratorium; “enforcement” includes recognition and registration; abiding a foreign costs decision is not waiver — seek leave first. JADE
• Sillsco Ltd v Hino Motors Ltd [2026] NZHC 1697 — representative settlement approved on the “reasonable range of fair outcomes” test; categorised loss formulas over exact calculations where verification costs would eat the fund; conditional fee premium on fees, not the settlement sum. JADE

Practice Desk

• Casey v Blair-Bellamy [2026] NZHC 1935 — before administration a residuary beneficiary holds only a chose in action; a deed varying a minor’s statutory trust is not valid without court approval, and its failure can unwind the arrangement against the adults too; mistake relief unavailable where parties knowingly assumed values. JADE

Rapid file

• Burrell v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2026] NZCA 309 — extended supervision order challenges proceed as sentence appeals; the term must be the minimum the risk requires. JADE
• Commerce Commission v Kiwise Trading Ltd [2026] NZHC 1621 — product safety sentencing follows orthodox principles and the established culpability catalogue, not rigid bands; financial-capacity discounts need proof of actual inability to pay. JADE
• Ataria v The King [2026] NZHC 1985 — appellate focus on the end sentence, not the arithmetic; EM bail credit in the 30–50% range on detailed evidence; departures from a sentence indication require explicit reasons. JADE
• Foster v Accident Compensation Corporation [2026] NZHC 1602 — special leave declined — whether CRPS is a physical injury did not present a seriously arguable question of law. JADE

Also on the docket

• Manage My Health Ltd v Unknown Defendants [2026] NZHC 2119 — injunction against unknown defendants over a health data breach. JADE

The remaining decisions of the fortnight, including the Supreme Court’s interlocutory cluster and the estates list, are indexed in The Petal’s New Zealand edition of 27 July 2026 at ledger.jade.io.

Some matters this episode concern youth offending; they are reported as legal doctrine only. Produced by BarNet OpenLaw, the creators of JADE.

The voices in this program are AI-generated. Nothing in this program is legal advice.

Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail

The Petal daily brief for Tuesday 28 July 2026, the federal courts edition — eleven decisions, led by the Full Court’s decision upholding the racial hatred provisions and clarifying the implied freedom analysis, then $55 million in penalties for interest-free advertising that was not the whole story.

Features:

Public Law Desk

• Hanson v Faruqi [2026] FCAFC 96 — Part IIA of the Racial Discrimination Act is valid under the external affairs power; s 18C burdens the implied freedom significantly but proportionately; the objective test is informed by expert contextual evidence; motivation is a causation inquiry reaching characteristics factually inextricable from race; s 18D requires rational connection and conscientious harm minimisation. JADE
• RST v Anti-Discrimination Commissioner (NT) [2026] FCA 990 — the s 65(2) discretion to accept out-of-time complaints is confined only by subject matter, scope and purpose; analogous statutory factors may be adopted; provisionally considering conduct “if proved” is not prejudgment; suppression orders preserved anonymity. JADE

Commercial Law Desk

• ASIC v Latitude Finance Australia (No 4) [2026] FCA 989 — $35m (Harvey Norman) and $20m (Latitude) penalties for interest-free promotions that did not disclose the linked credit card and fees; a theoretical maximum in the trillions is meaningless as a yardstick — deterrence, harm, management involvement and contrition set the figure; injunctions refused, website adverse publicity ordered. JADE

Practice & Procedure Desk

• Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd v ACCC [2026] FCA 1000 — an affidavit performing the function of a pleading is a “similar document” open to non-party inspection without leave; discretionary access granted before reading in open court; confidentiality objections need specific evidence. JADE
• Bovell v State of Western Australia [2026] FCA 991 — broad discovery of inventor documents is not the default; applicants must show significant probative value on specific validity issues; briefing experts on inventor papers risks hindsight reasoning. JADE
• Lucky v Ives [2026] FCA 995 — review of a Registrar’s sequestration order proceeds de novo; opposition on a bare-assertion counterclaim fails without admissible evidence. JADE
• Zhejiang Lishui Mengxiang Education Development Co Ltd v Pan [2026] FCA 992 — foreign arbitral award enforced via a two-stage process with authentication, certification, multi-method service into China (text, email, physical) and payment-date currency conversion. JADE

Also on the docket

• Australian Strategic Materials Ltd (No 2) [2026] FCA 988 — scheme meetings postponed for supplementary disclosure; dispatch errors cured as inadvertent irregularities under s 1322. JADE
• Scott, in the matter of Axify Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 1005 — s 444GA leave to transfer non-consenting members’ shares where they have nil residual value and liquidation is the only alternative. JADE
• Afzal v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2026] FCA 998 — evidence of a mental health condition is not evidence of unfitness to participate; represented parties are bound by tactical decisions. JADE
• Yasmin v Commonwealth of Australia (No 4) [2026] FCA 1007 — interlocutory orders. JADE

Some matters this episode concern racial discrimination; they are reported as legal doctrine only. Produced by BarNet OpenLaw, the creators of JADE, from The Petal’s Australia Federal Courts edition of 28 July 2026.

The voices in this program are AI-generated. Nothing in this program is legal advice.

Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail

The Petal daily brief for Tuesday 28 July 2026, the appeal courts edition: the inactive director whose inaction was the breach, the satisfaction clause that let a buyer walk, and the property line that divides private access rights from public nuisance.

Features:

Commercial Law Desk

• Kim v JM World AU Pty Ltd (in liq); Bak v JM World AU Pty Ltd (in liq) [2026] NSWCA 146 — s 127 non-compliance does not invalidate a contract — authority implied from an inactive co-director’s acquiescence; by majority, an inactive director’s ongoing failure can satisfy s 1317H causation where it enables the active director’s wrongdoing (Leeming JA dissenting on the counterfactual); equitable charge imposed over personal property benefited by company-funded improvements; compound interest on equitable compensation. JADE
• Brades Property Agnes Water Pty Ltd v Skyrock Sun Pty Ltd [2026] QCA 141 — “subject to satisfaction” special conditions: condition precedent to performance, not formation; whether satisfaction must be reasonable as well as honest is a construction question; the challenger bears the onus of showing a reasonable person ought to have been satisfied; consistency with representations measured by practical certainty. JADE

Public Law Desk

• Clifffall Pty Ltd v Wollongong City Council (No 2) [2026] NSWCA 149 — the s 6(1) Roads Act right of access is coextensive with the common law private right — the ability to cross the boundary; road-reserve impediments engage public nuisance instead; no absolute right to vehicular access. JADE

Practice & Procedure Desk

• Kearney v Amirbeaggi (No 2) [2026] NSWCA 150 — a party abandoning a motion ordinarily pays; the merits of the abandoned application may be considered; a tutor acting without a solicitor would be unprecedented; costs immunisation inappropriate in private litigation. JADE

The Full Federal Court’s decision in Hanson v Faruqi [2026] FCAFC 96, cross-listed in this edition, has its full treatment in today’s Australian Federal Courts episode. JADE

Produced by BarNet OpenLaw, the creators of JADE, from The Petal’s Australia Court of Appeal edition of 28 July 2026.

The voices in this program are AI-generated. Nothing in this program is legal advice.

Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail

The Petal daily brief for Monday 27 July 2026, the tribunals edition — the heaviest tribunals day this program has covered, sixteen decisions, including the program’s first full docket from the Australian Trade Marks Office.

Features:

Tribunals Desk

• Athens v The Owners–Strata Plan No 47035 (No 2) [2026] NSWCATAP 233 — the $30,000 costs threshold is measured by the rights in dispute in the appeal itself, not at first instance; high valuations of underlying works do not trigger the exception; costs variations may be decided on the papers. JADE
• Tremaine v Gems Painting Pty Ltd [2026] NSWCATAP 235 — s 10 Home Building Act does not preclude deducting unpaid contract monies when assessing damages against an unlicensed contractor; Bellgrove v Eldridge applied; NCAT’s usual deduction practice affirmed. JADE
• Burmeister v AMDE Construction Pty Ltd t/as GJ Gardner Homes Sydney North [2026] NSWCATAP 229 — lost-rent claims under Hadley v Baxendale’s second limb need evidence of the builder’s actual knowledge of the rental intention; reopening requires a clear explanation for evidence not led. JADE

The Trade Marks Office block (Commercial Desk)

• Basmathi opposition (Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority v Australasian Foods) [2026] ATMO 135 — reputation in an alleged geographical indication requires recognition as a badge of origin, not mere descriptive understanding; the passing off and consumer law grounds fell with it; equivocal surveys insufficient. JADE
• Hong Chen opposition [2026] ATMO 131 — s 62A bad faith: two-step test (subjective knowledge, then objective commercial standards); trade-mark warehousing inferred from filing patterns, unusual marks and overseas correspondences. JADE
• WellNova removal [2026] ATMO 129 — non-use: documentary evidence required; bare assertions carry little weight. JADE
• Men Xui Do removal [2026] ATMO 130 — substantial identity of variant marks assessed side by side. JADE
• Qiuling Chen removal [2026] ATMO 128 — s 101(3) discretion: abandonment, residual reputation, market re-entry. JADE
• SimAngus marks (Australian SimAngus Cattle Breeders Association) [2026] ATMO 133 — breed-name marks maintained. JADE
• Trade mark application 2480344 [2026] ATMO 132 — statutory interpretation. JADE

Rapid file

• Hafeez v Secretary, Department of Customer Service [2026] NSWCATOD 105 — no tribunal power to determine equivalence of qualifications; strict “Experience” requirements. JADE
• Sarson v Medical Council of New South Wales [2026] NSWCATOD 101 — costs on a discontinued review in the protective jurisdiction. JADE
• McNally v Resolution Life Australasia Limited [2026] NSWCATAP 231 — jurisdictional error appeal dismissed. JADE
• Kaempfe v University of NSW (No 2) [2026] NSWCATAD 220 — victimisation complaint dismissed. JADE

Also on the docket

• Matruglio v Secretary to the Department of Government Services [2026] VCAT 585 — working with children check review. JADE
• Sahib Pty Ltd v Mitchell SC [2026] VCAT 566 — planning permit — childcare centre. JADE

Produced by BarNet OpenLaw, the creators of JADE, from The Petal’s Tribunals edition of 27 July 2026.

The voices in this program are AI-generated. Nothing in this program is legal advice.

Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail

The Petal daily brief for Monday 27 July 2026, the federal courts edition. A quiet day, three decisions that earn their place: five-year site-blocking orders with a rapid-response window for new releases, the implied undertaking that outlives a discontinued case, and the Family Desk’s first daily appearance.

Features:

Commercial Law Desk

• Universal City Studios Productions LLLP v Telstra Limited (No 2) [2026] FCA 983 — the customary three-year site-blocking term is not a principled limit — five-year orders granted on evidence of continuing infringement; a “New Release” regime enables urgent short-notice blocking during a defined content window; threatened infringement inferred from promotion of an impending release. JADE

Practice & Procedure Desk

• Sandilands v Commonwealth Broadcasting Corporation Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 986 — the Hearne v Street implied undertaking turns on compulsion: affidavits filed under compulsion are protected, voluntary filings under timetabling orders may not be, and settlement timing can decide which; guidance on costs in discontinued proceedings. JADE

Family Law Desk

• Suss & Kunkle [2026] FedCFamC1A 127 — adjournment refusals are generally not appellable alone; the s 102NA cross-examination bar does not justify an adjournment where lack of representation flows from the party’s own delay; late-disclosed documents need a compelling explanation; abandoned grounds cannot be revived without notice; parenting courts are not bound by the parties’ concessions. JADE

Produced by BarNet OpenLaw, the creators of JADE, from The Petal’s Australia Federal Courts edition of 27 July 2026.

The voices in this program are AI-generated. Nothing in this program is legal advice.

Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail

The Petal daily brief for Monday 27 July 2026, the appeal courts edition: judicial review of a prosecutor’s discontinuance through the narrowest of doors, the misstated maximum penalty and counsel’s duty to catch it, and disadvantage that counts without a causation audit.

Features:

Public Law Desk

• Harkness v Banks [2026] VSCA 178 — DPP decisions to discontinue are not wholly insusceptible to judicial review, but only for a rare subset of jurisdictional error exceeding the objective limits of the power; ordinary grounds unavailable; commencement decisions keep their stronger protection. JADE

Criminal Law Desk

• Stewart Elliot Smythe (a pseudonym) v The State of Western Australia [2026] WASCA 107 — a mistake as to the maximum penalty is an error of law, material where it shifts the offending into the wrong category; counsel must correct a misstated maximum before final orders; resentencing fixes infected sentences then reassesses totality; arduous conditions mitigate only where materially more onerous than the general population. JADE
• Armstrong v R [2026] NSWCCA 112 — proof of a causal connection between disadvantaged background and offending is not required for mitigation of moral culpability; a prescriptive bright-line causation test is an error of principle. JADE

Also on the docket

• Seek Justice Pty Ltd v USM Events Pty Ltd [2026] NSWCA 148 — deregistration of a company mid-litigation and its consequences. JADE
• Luo v Health Care Complaints Commission [2026] NSWCA 145 — leave to appeal refused. JADE
• Sanjiv v Shah [2026] NSWCA 151 — interlocutory application concerning service. JADE

The family law appeal cross-listed in this edition, Suss & Kunkle [2026] FedCFamC1A 127, has its full treatment in today’s Australian Federal Courts episode. JADE

Some matters this episode concern sexual offences against children; they are reported as legal doctrine only. Produced by BarNet OpenLaw, the creators of JADE, from The Petal’s Australia Court of Appeal edition of 27 July 2026.

The voices in this program are AI-generated. Nothing in this program is legal advice.

Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail

The Petal daily brief for Wednesday 22 July 2026 — and something new: the first of our state editions. One state, every court, one brief. New South Wales: a prisoner's constitutional claim to the lawyer of his choice, a default interest rate priced as a penalty, payroll tax reaching through a cleaning group's contractors, and a planning double on which walls of a planning scheme can move.

Features:

Public Law Desk — two judicial review decisions from the Court of Appeal.

• Hamzy v Commissioner of Corrective Services [2026] NSWCA 140 — Chapter III confers no unfettered right to a lawyer of choice; visitor security screening for extreme high risk inmates valid; the implied freedom of political communication restrains legislative power rather than conferring personal rights; legal unreasonableness requires the absence of an evident and intelligible justification. JADE
• Hika Tarawa Te-Kowhai v Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Treaty [2026] NSWCA 138 — a statutory body may act through a duly authorised officer without formal delegation; the judicial review applicant bears the onus of proving non-compliance; the presumption of regularity fills evidentiary gaps. JADE

Commercial Law Desk — the interest rate that doubled, and a voidable transaction defence.

• Blackbird First Mortgage Corporation Pty Ltd v Cam Engineering & Construction Pty Ltd [2026] NSWSC 876 — default interest doubling void as a penalty; disproportion shifts the evidentiary burden to the lender; an eight-item checklist of justifying evidence; severance leaves the standard rate running; a Dobbs certificate must conform to the contract's manner and form. JADE
• Westwood Capital Pty Ltd v Darin (liquidator of Portman Securities Pty Ltd) [2026] NSWCA 141 — the s 588FG(2) defence requires every element; suspicion means positive apprehension judged without hindsight; rejected evidence of inquiries leaves an evidentiary void; the guarantee claim fails with the avoided transaction. JADE

Tax Desk — payroll tax and the interposed group.

• Cerisewin Pty Ltd atf Mastercare Administrative Services Trust v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2026] NSWSC 877 — employment agency contracts; services procured 'in and for' the client's business; one group company can be the client of another; deemed wages include contractor margins and overheads. JADE

Planning double — which walls move.

• Etherington v North Sydney Council [2026] NSWCA 137 — the s 4.55(2) modification power carries decisional freedom; a whole application may be rejected though elements are acceptable; seek partial approval expressly; remitter terms cannot constrain a discretionary merits outcome. JADE
• Dellimanolis v Canterbury Bankstown Council [2026] NSWLEC 1443 — external road characteristics are not an 'aspect of the development'; the access restriction is a jurisdictional precondition, not a development standard, and cl 4.6 cannot vary it. JADE

Criminal Law Desk — procedure on sentence.

• Colak v R [2026] NSWCCA 108 — an unsigned s 16BA schedule vitiates sentence; no arraignment, conviction or separate punishment on schedule offences; remittal to correct the record and preserve appeal rights. JADE

Practice & Procedure Desk — the rapid file.

• KLH v Northern NSW Local Health District (No 2) [2026] NSWCA 143 — a stay pending special leave requires exceptional circumstances; futility is significant but not determinative against the balance of convenience. JADE
• Keybridge Capital Ltd v Bolton (No 3) [2026] NSWCA 142 — costs follow the event; an incidental unsuccessful contention at no significant added cost does not displace the general rule. JADE
• Kedwell v Clarence Colliery Pty Limited [2026] NSWCA 139 — failing to determine a pleaded disease-aggravation limb is an error of law; a judge's independent causation theory must be put to the parties; remittal where facts are untested. JADE

Also on the docket

• Mulroe v Central Coast Council [2026] NSWLEC 1444 — merits appeal decided on navigational safety grounds. JADE

Some matters this episode concern child abuse material offences and compulsory medical treatment; they are reported as legal doctrine only. Produced by BarNet OpenLaw, the creators of JADE, from The Petal's New South Wales edition of 22 July 2026. The voices in this program are AI-generated. Nothing in this program is legal advice.

Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail

The Petal daily brief for Thursday 23 July 2026, the tribunals edition — where most Australians actually meet the law. Damages methodology in a domestic building dispute, residual diplomatic immunity in a tenancy, and the cost of walking away from an appeal.

Features:

• Stanley v EWH Construction West Pty Ltd [2026] VCAT 571 — building damages shown step by step: index-based cost inflation uplift, evidenced alternative accommodation and storage, and a particularised award for loss of amenity and physical inconvenience — not a formulaic percentage. JADE
• Zin & Anor v Alkahtani [2026] ACAT 47 — residual diplomatic immunity protects only official acts — a private tenancy is not one; fair wear and tear distinguished from compensable damage; depreciation-based quantification for aged floorboards. JADE
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 48238 v Zhu [2026] NSWCATAP 230 — tribunal costs on a withdrawn appeal: the six leading principles, special circumstances found, and the requirements for a gross sum order. JADE
• Aniko Property Management Pty Ltd v Beal [2026] QCATA 118 — leave to appeal where the construction question has public value; rectification of a clerical mistake needs proof of knowledge or shared intention. JADE

The rapid file and docket:

• Gear v Office of Industrial Relations (No 2) [2026] QCATA 114 — four-part test for document production; fishing expeditions in question-of-law appeals. JADE
• Ward v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2026] NSWCATOD 103 — internal review prerequisite, time limits, and mandatory refusal provisions. JADE
• Watkinson v Bayside Council [2026] NSWCATAD 218 — development application review, noted for the record. JADE

Produced from The Petal's TRIBUNALS Edition of 23 July 2026 at ledger.jade.io — provided to JADE Professional Plus subscribers. The voices in this program are AI-generated. Nothing in this program is legal advice. Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail

The Petal daily brief for Thursday 23 July 2026, the federal courts edition. A quiet day whose lead really matters: a superannuation class action settlement approval that prices the lawyers' own disclosure obligations.

Features:

• Alford v AMP Superannuation Limited (No 3) [2026] FCA 923 — s 33V settlement approval: recoverability risk material to fairness; practical distribution schemes without individual review; late disclosure of a budget increase is a significant change voiding the costs agreement in futuro — fair and reasonable costs only, uplift gone; costs proportionality tested prospectively. JADE
• Qube Ports Pty Ltd v CFMMEU [2026] FCA 978 — enterprise agreements construed purposively; silence on transitioning employees does not defeat accrued entitlements; implied reasonable adjustments reconcile remuneration structures; appellants must show operative error vitiating the relief. JADE

The rapid file:

• Stelamar LLC v Soar.Earth Limited (subject to DOCA) [2026] FCA 981 — the costs of a security for costs application belong in the quantum; 70% solicitors / 100% counsel benchmarks; cogent basis required; deed administrators as contradictors. JADE
• LK Law Pty Ltd v Karas (No 8) [2026] FCA 952 — split costs orders on a change of position; costs follow substantial success in stay applications; logical-connection test for apprehended bias. JADE

Produced from The Petal's Australia Federal Courts Edition of 23 July 2026 at ledger.jade.io — provided to JADE Professional Plus subscribers. The voices in this program are AI-generated. Nothing in this program is legal advice. Theme music by Michael Green SC.

Send us Fan Mail

The Petal daily brief for Wednesday 22 July 2026, the federal courts edition — the heaviest federal day this program has covered, 23 decisions. The specialist cut of several features aired on The Fortnight in Practice; this is the daily record.

Features:

• Gall v Domino's Pizza Enterprises Limited (No 4) [2026] FCA 967 — the Fair Work Act is not an exclusive code: award-referable loss recoverable from a franchisor under ACL s 236; representations to franchisees about labour costs are in trade or commerce; passive indirect causation; reliance inferred from systems. JADE
• ASIC v Noumi Limited (No 7) [2026] FCA 958 — s 180(1) follows responsibilities actually assumed; duty to correct material errors in published financials endures to the next reporting period; s 344(1) is temporal; s 674(2A) accessory case failed for want of actual knowledge. JADE
• Elvin v Fair Work Ombudsman [2026] FCAFC 92 — a DOCA does not extinguish a director's s 550 accessorial liability for post-administration regulator claims; warn a self-represented litigant before drawing a Jones v Dunkel inference; regulator's forensic choices are discretionary. JADE
• Puru v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2026] FCA 937 — tribunal reasons assembled from another case's template: copying reaching the evaluative core is a failure of independent merits review; Direction 110 considerations get independent weight; children considered child by child. JADE
• QHXW v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2026] FCA 960 — aliens power: within the Pochi limit Parliament sets the criteria; Australian parentage does not preclude alien status; no holistic ties audit. JADE
• International Animal Health Products Pty Ltd v APVMA [2026] FCA 959 — 'valid scientific argument' bears its ordinary meaning; expert deductive reasoning suffices; regulatory precedent relevant; procedural fairness denied where an unraised issue decided the outcome. JADE
• DP World (Fremantle) Ltd v CFMMEU [2026] FCA 944 — 'automation' means processes without human intervention; remote control with continuous human operation is not automation; four-proposition framework for technology clauses; declaratory relief tailored narrowly. JADE

Also on the docket:

• Miller v Attorney-General (Cth) [2026] FCA 943 — departmental summary suffices unless materially deficient; obvious-inquiry and unreasonableness thresholds restated. JADE
• Grow Surge Pty Ltd (in liq) v Videriva Pty Ltd (in liq) [2026] FCA 974 — proof of debt review is a hearing de novo; inference of liability need only be more probable than the alternatives. JADE
• Dynamic Insurance Services Pty Ltd v Steadfast Group Limited [2026] FCA 964 — seven-factor test for corporate representation by a director. JADE
• Martin v GLF Martin (Services) Pty Limited [2026] FCA 963 — amendment where new claims arise from substantially the same facts; joinder of affected shareholders. JADE
• Tax Practitioners Board v Buckland (Default Judgment) [2026] FCA 950 — default judgment requirements; declarations without practical utility declined. JADE
• ASIC v Falcon Capital Limited (in liq) (No 3) [2026] FCA 954 — s 477(2A) approval framework for settlement deeds (cited unlinked).
• Preston, in the matter of the Forum Group (No 2) [2026] FCA 953 — receivers' remuneration: 11-factor reasonableness, proportionality, future caps. JADE
• Jackson v WS Remedial Group (NSW) Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 968 — one-day delay excused under the Brodie-Hanns factors. JADE
• Grigorovich v Morgan Environmental Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 966 — s 32AC transfer refused; six-factor checklist. JADE
• DIR22 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2026] FCA 961 — unarticulated protection claims: the raised-squarely test applied. JADE
• Mullaney v Qube Ports Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 955 — noted for the record. JADE

Produced from The Petal's Australia Federal Courts Edition of 22 July 2026 at ledger.jade.io — provided to JADE Professional Plus subscribers. The voices in this program are AI-generated. Nothing in this program is legal advice. Theme music by Michael Green SC.