House v R

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
Neutral Citation1936-0817 HCA A,[1936] HCA 40
Year1936
Date1936
CourtHigh Court

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
3239 cases
5 firm's commentaries
  • NSW Government Bulletin - Part 2: In the media, Practice and courts, Cases, Legislation
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 19 September 2022
    ...APPEALS - Leave to appeal - Principles governing - Public importance. APPEALS - From exercise of discretion - Whether House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 type error disclosed by the primary Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), ss 4(1)(d), 41, 80(2)(a), 83(1); Civi......
  • The art of assessing future quantum in personal injury cases - an appellate review
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 9 September 2019
    ...low or so inordinately high as to be wholly erroneous estimate of the damages suffered." This is referred to in House v King (1936) 55 CLR 499 as "the deferential standard applicable to appellate review of an exercise of judicial Macfarlan JA, however, argued that given that the award of ge......
  • Fair Work Commission - When will the Full Bench entertain an unfair dismissal appeal?
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 25 October 2019
    ...discretionary nature of the decision the subject of the appeal, also directed the Full Bench's attention to the principles in House v R (1936) 55 CLR 499 which it reproduced as "It is not enough that the judges composing the appellate court consider that, if they had been in the position of......
  • Fair Work Commission - When will the Full Bench entertain an appeal?
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 27 November 2019
    ...discretionary nature of the decision the subject of the appeal, also directed the Full Bench's attention to the principles in House v R (1936) 55 CLR 499 which it reproduced as "It is not enough that the judges composing the appellate court consider that, if they had been in the position of......
  • Get Started for Free
9 books & journal articles
  • The 2017 Winterton Lecture. Sir Owen Dixon Today
    • Australia
    • University of Western Australia Law Review No. 43-1, January 2018
    • 1 January 2018
    ...of Taxation (2015) 255 CLR 439, [20]-[22], [140]-[144]; [2015] HCA 25. 100 (1938) 61 CLR 337, 363; [1938] HCA 73. 101 (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40. 102 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499, 505; [1936] HCA 40. 103 (1937) 59 CLR 641, 675-7; [1937] HCA 53, further discussed by Sir Owen Dixo......
  • Litigation
    • United Kingdom
    • Construction Law. Volume III - Third Edition
    • 13 April 2020
    ...per Spigelman CJ and Allsop P. he reference system in the Australian courts was discussed earlier in this chapter. 1350 House v he King (1936) 55 CLR 499 at 504–505; he Council of the City of Sydney v Woodward [2000] NSWCA 201 at [94], per Heydon JA [17 BCL 42]. 1351 See, eg, Allmen Industr......
  • The Nature of Merits Review: A Bold Vision Realised in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Federal Law Review No. 41-2, June 2013
    • 1 June 2013
    ...of the ACCC is conditioned upon its first _____________________________________________________________________________________ 165 (1936) 55 CLR 499, 505. 166 East Australian Pipeline Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (2007) 233 CLR 229, 250 [79]. 167 Ibid 25 0 [80].......
  • Time Limitations on Applications for Judicial Review
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Federal Law Review No. 32-1, March 2004
    • 1 March 2004
    ...v Australian Securities Commission (1993) 42 FCR 578 (Gummow, Hill and Cooper JJ). 78 The principles are enunciated in House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; Gronow v Gronow (1979) 144 CLR 513, 519–20 (Stephen J); Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Phillip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170, 177 ......
  • Get Started for Free