Clark v Chief of Defence Force [1999] FCA 1252

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Clark v Chief of Defence Force [1999] FCA 1252 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Whether grant of leave for "specified" period needs to be for a definite period – Whether Chief of Defence Force has power to revoke leave without pay – Whether refusal to exercise discretion to revoke leave became unreasonable when the conditions for the grant of leave no longer existed – Whether failure to exercise discretion was an exercise of power for a purpose other than the purpose for which the power was conferred – Whether an officer is entitled to remuneration under industrial instrument when no duties have been performed – Whether applicant rendered full time continuous service without performing duties – Relevant of industrial law precepts to interpretation of services remuneration and leave determination. Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth), s 33(3) Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth), ss 5(1)(e), 5(2)(g), 11 Air Force Regulations (Cth), rr 72(1), 73(5) Air Force Act 1923 (Cth), ss 4B, 4G(1) Defence Act 1903 (Cth), ss 4(1), 58B, 58H(2)(a) Defence Force Disciplinary Act 1982 (Cth), s 96(6) Australian Bank Employees Union v National Australia Bank (1989) 31 IR 437, applied Automatic Fire Sprinklers v Watson (1946) 72 CLR 435, distinguished Byrne v Australian Airlines (1995) 185 CLR 410, applied Comptroller General of Customs v Kawasaki Motors (1991) 32 FCR 219, applied Coutts v Commonwealth (1985) 157 CLR 91, applied Gapes v Commercial Bank of Australia (1979) 41 FLR 27, applied Heating Centre v Trade Practices Commission (1986) 65 ALR 429, cited Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend (1986) 162 CLR 24, applied R v Anderson; Ex parte Ipec-Air (1965) 113 CLR 177, applied R v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal; Ex parte 2HD (1979) 144 CLR 45, applied Seymour v Stawell Timber Industries (1985) 9 FCR 241, applied TCN Channel 9 v AMP (1982) 42 ALR 426, cited GARY JAMES CLARK v CHIEF OF DEFENCE FORCE NG 385 of 1998