- Migration Agents Registration Authority v Frugtniet  FCAFC 5
- GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Limited (No 3)  FCA 183
- Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (Castlemaine Police Station Case)  FCAFC 1
The penalty privilege – whether available in AAT proceedings
In Migration Agents Registration Authority v Frugtniet  FCAFC 5 (30 January 2018), the Full Court considered whether the privilege against exposure to a penalty (‘penalty privilege’) was available to a respondent in his Administrative Appeals Tribunal (‘AAT’) proceedings.
In an AAT review, the conference registrar made procedural directions including that Mr Frugtniet give the AAT and the Migration Agents Registration Authority (‘MARA’) witness statements, documents and a statement of facts, issues and contentions. A deputy president rejected Mr Frugtniet’s objection to these orders on the basis of the penalty privilege. The deputy president also affirmed the decision of the MARA to cancel Mr Frugtniet’s registration as a migration agent.