Briginshaw v Briginshaw
| Jurisdiction | Australia Federal only |
| Neutral Citation | 1938-0630 HCA A,[1938] HCA 34 |
| Date | 1938 |
| Year | 1938 |
| Court | High Court |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
1178 cases
- Rangott v Sharp
- Rangott v Sharp
- Nine Films & Television Pty Ltd v Ninox Television Ltd
- Dye v Commonwealth Securities Ltd (No 2)
Request a trial to view additional results
14 firm's commentaries
-
Abuse: Childcare centre appeal decision.
...against Mr Bird were of such gravity as to attract the application of the principles in Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336; [1938] HCA 34, as reflected in s 140(2) of the Evidence Act (the Briginshaw standard). The principal issues on appeal were: 1. whether the disclosures of Child ......
-
Abuse: Childcare centre appeal decision.
...against Mr Bird were of such gravity as to attract the application of the principles in Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336; [1938] HCA 34, as reflected in s 140(2) of the Evidence Act (the Briginshaw standard). The principal issues on appeal were: 1. whether the disclosures of Child ......
-
Property & Projects - What's News - 2 June 2015
...of proof – Civil proceedings – Whether signatures were forged – Strength of evidence required to meet standard – Briginshaw v Briginshaw [1938] HCA 34; (1938) 60 CLR 336 applied. EVIDENCE – Credibility and weight – Party's failure to adduce evidence on fact in issue – Adverse inference – Ap......
-
The standard of proof in workplace investigations
...It guides the interpretation of section 140 of the Evidence Act. The often cited statement of Dixon J in Briginshaw v Briginshaw [1938] HCA 34; (1938) 60 CLR 336 at 361-362 is of importance in illustrating the Fortunately ... at common law no third standard of persuasion was definitely deve......
Request a trial to view additional results
8 books & journal articles
-
The 2017 Winterton Lecture. Sir Owen Dixon Today
...the High Court of Australia, (2003) 3, 13. 32 (1937) 56 CLR 605, 637; [1937] HCA 17. 33 [1915] 1 KB 1. 34 (1938) 60 CLR 336 at 360-363; [1938] HCA 34. 35 satisfaction”, Dixon J referred extensively to the treatise of Professor Wigmore. So it is no surprise to read Dixon in 1942 telling the ......
-
Litigation
...SGHC 51 at [29], per Edmud Leow JC. 984 See Grant v Australian Knitting Mills [1936] AC 85 at 98 (PC). 985 Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336 at 361–362, per Dixon J. See also Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) section 140; Ballard v Multiplex Ltd [2012] NSWSC 426 at [123]–[130], per McDougall ......
-
The Definition and Discovery of Facts in Native Title: The Historian's Contribution
...(Beaumont and von Doussa JJ); Yorta Yorta (2001) 110 FCR 244, 284–6 [151]–[159] (Branson and Katz JJ). 58 Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336, 343–4 (Latham CJ), 361–3 (Dixon J); Bater v Bater [1950] 2 All ER 458, 459 (Denning LJ). 308 Federal Law Review Volume 36 ____________________......
-
Some Australian reflections on Roncarelli v. Duplessis.
...Groves, Judicial Review of Administrative Action, 4th ed. (Sydney: Thornson Reuters, 2009) at 641-46. (119) See Briginshaw v. Briginshaw, [1938] HCA 34, 60 C.L.R. 336. Deakin and Randall are critical of the House of Lords's failure in OBG to use a "presumption" that people intend the probab......
Request a trial to view additional results