When Power Meets Fairness: Why House v R Still Governs Good Judgment
Sentencing discretion is one of the quiet engines of fairness in Australian law. House v R (1936) remains the compass: it tells courts when to intervene, and shows businesses today why documented reasoning, proportional decisions and transparent processes matter more than ever.
When a Bank Took a Family Home Without Explaining the Risk
Commercial Bank of Australia v Amadio remains the leading case on unconscionable conduct. The High Court set aside a guarantee taken from vulnerable guarantors because the bank failed to explain critical risks it knew they could not understand.
Power That Can Be Used Against You
Minister for Public Works v Renard Constructions reshaped Australian contract law by confirming that broad contractual powers must be exercised reasonably and for a proper purpose. The case remains a leading authority on good faith, discretion, and fairness in commercial agreements.
Clarity Without Guesswork: What Mount Bruce Mining v Wright Prospecting Teaches Every Australian About Contracts
A decades-old mining agreement triggered a $130 million dispute because key phrases were read differently years later. The High Court restored commercial common sense: contracts mean what reasonable businesspeople would understand in their proper context. This case shows how clarity of structure protects everyone — and how ambiguity grows costly when decisions rely on a single interpretation.