Notes on Sources of Private Law, Reading Cases, and IRAC

In the spirit of reconciliation, Bond University acknowledges the Kombumerri people, the traditional Owners and Custodians of the land on which the university now stands. We pay respect to Elders past, present and emerging.

This material has been reproduced and communicated by or on behalf of Bond University in accordance with section 113P of the Copyright Act 1968.
The material may be subject to copyright under the Act.
Any further reproduction or communication of this material may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act.
Do not remove this notice.

Common law: law developed through judicial decisions, based on the principle of precedent, meaning past court decisions influence how future cases are decided.
Other sources referenced in course structure: Statute, Case Law, Equity.
Common law vs other sources: overview of their roles and interaction.

Statute can overrule common law, codify common law, create new rules, modify common law, limit or restrict certain procedures, create new rights.
Statute Case law: case law cannot overrule statute.
Key takeaway: statutory law and case law interact; statute has primacy over common law where encodable.

In this course, the focus is on Case Law.
Equity and Statute are important, but the emphasis is on how case law operates and interprets the law.
(Note: the idea that legislation and the common law are in a symbiotic relationship is highlighted in readings.)

Functions of case law: 01 Interpret legislation; 02 Draw analogies; 03 Judicial reasoning.
Quote: “Legislation and the common law are not separate and independent sources of law; They exist in a symbiotic relationship.“ (Gleeson CJ, Brodie v Singleton Shire Council)

CASE BRIEF: Short summary of facts, key issues and outcome; include how the judge(s) reached their conclusions; evaluate whether the decision makes sense; include your opinion.
CASE ANALYSIS: Summarises facts, key issue and outcome, but also interrogates and analyzes the reasoning and implications beyond the surface.

IRAC stands for: Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion.
Steps:
- Spot the legal issues.
- Outline the relevant law addressing the issues.
- Apply the law to the client’s situation.
- Come to a conclusion as to the likely outcome.

Scenario: Maria owns a cafe and receives bottled mineral water from a distributor. Each bottle is clearly marked: “Property of Blue Springs Co. – Not for resale or refill.”
Instead of returning the empty bottles per the service agreement, Sarah refills, reseals and resells them as “local mineral water” without informing customers that the bottles originally belonged to another company.
Blue Springs Co. discovers this and alleges Maria committed the tort of conversion.
BROAD ISSUE: Whether Maria converted Blue Springs’ property by refilling and reselling the water bottles without proper authorization.

Penfolds Wines Pty Ltd v Elliott (1946) $74\,CLR\,204$
- Essence of conversion: a dealing with a chattel in a manner repugnant to the immediate right of possession of the person who has the property or special property in the chattel.
- Quote (paraphrased): "[D]amage to the chattel is not conversion, nor is use, nor is a transfer of possession otherwise than for the purpose of affecting the immediate right to possession, nor is it always conversion to lose the goods beyond hope of recovery. An intent to do that which would deprive 'the true owner' of his immediate right to possession or impair it may be said to form the essential ground of the tort."
- RULE: If a person intends to do something which would deprive 'the true owner' of their immediate right to possession or impair it, then they have committed the tort.
APPLYING THE RULE:
- Did Maria deal with the property in a way inconsistent with Blue Springs’ right to possession?
- Did Maria intend to deprive or impair Blue Springs’ right to possession?

On the facts, it appears Maria did / did not intend to deprive or impair Blue Springs of their right to possess the bottles.

Maria temporarily lends five of the empty Blue Springs bottles to a food stall to serve tap water, with return expected within 24 hours and without altering the bottles.
IRAC IN PRACTICE: DOES YOUR ANSWER DIFFER? WHY / WHY NOT?

Rixon v Star City Ltd (2001) 53 NSWLR 98 (case on battery)
White v Johnston (2015) 87 NSWLR 779 (case on battery)
Barton v Armstrong [1969] 2 NSWR 451 (assault – threats)
McHale v Watson (1964) 111 CLR 384 (trespass, negligence)
McFadzean v CFMEU [2004] VSC 289 (false imprisonment)
Lewis v Australian Capital Territory [2020] HCA 26; 271 CLR 192; 94 ALJR 740; 381 ALR 375 (false imprisonment)
Can you find these cases?

The relationship between legislation and case law as interdependent sources of law.
The practical use of IRAC as a structured method for legal problem-solving.
The importance of distinguishing case briefs from case analyses for exam preparation.
How to identify and apply elements of conversion in torts, using Penfolds Wines as anchor case.