Lists of Authorities and Citations Practice Note (GPN-AUTH)
Update: Hyperlinks to case citations in Lists of Authorities
As part of its consultation and feedback process, the Court has received a number of enquiries principally concerning paragraph 2.2 of the Lists of Authorities and Citations Practice Note (GPN-AUTH) which was issued on 25 October 2016. These enquiries relate to (1) the requirement to hyperlink cases and (2) how to best hyperlink cases.
The intention of the hyperlink requirement was to utilise the List of Authorities to facilitate the accessing of authorities electronically. Some parties do not have easy access to reported versions of cases (that are accessible through subscription-only databases). Practitioners have also raised queries about whether the Court will be able to access hyperlinks to cases from specific subscription-only databases.
Although the Court’s 12-month review period for feedback on the General Practice Notes has concluded, given the queries about the hyperlink requirement, parties and practitioners are advised of the following interim arrangements:
- The Court does not require the List of Authorities to be hyperlinked but it remains as an option for parties to adopt if they consider it to be helpful, efficient and cost effective to do so; and
- If a party chooses to include hyperlinks in the List of Authorities, any hyperlink made from a subscriber of a subscription-only database is able to be accessed by another subscriber of the same database. Parties should not be concerned that the Court is unable to access such links.
The Court will review practice note GPN-AUTH and consider making formal amendments to it, including amendments giving effect to the interim arrangements described above.
Further information regarding ongoing feedback about the Court’s practice notes can be found here.
Lists of Authorities and Citations Practice Note (GPN-AUTH)
General Practice Note
1.1 This practice note provides guidance for the use of Lists of Authorities in all final hearings (including appeals), unless or to the extent that the Court otherwise orders. It applies to all parties, including those parties that are not represented by a lawyer.
1.2 This practice note takes effect from the date it is issued and, to the extent practicable, applies to proceedings whether filed before, or after, the date of issuing.
1.3 When reading this practice note, parties should have regard to the Definitions (which are set out in "Annexure A").
2. Form and Content of List of Authorities
2.1 Where a party is required to file a List of Authorities ("List"), the List must be divided into:
(a) Part "A": which must contain only authorities from which passages are to be read; and
(b) Part "B": which must contain authorities to which a party might refer, but from which passages are not to be read.
2.2 Given that a List is ordinarily filed electronically via eLodgment, parties should prepare the List in electronic form in such a manner so as to hyperlink each case citation to an online resource (so that the full case is easily accessible via the hyperlink). In filing the List parties should:
(a) eLodge the List; and
(b) email the List in Microsoft Word format to the relevant chambers.
References to Legislation
2.3 References to legislation must specify the jurisdiction and the relevant sections, regulations, rules or clauses.
2.4 If the legislation is to be considered as it was at a particular point of time, the reference should state the point of time.
References to Cases
2.5 A reference to a case must include:
(a) the name under which the case is reported or, where the case is unreported, the names of the parties to the case;
(b) its citation in an authorised series of reports (if available) or another series of reports (if the case has not been reported in an authorised series), or the medium neutral citation; and
(c) reference to the relevant page or paragraph numbers.
2.6 Example citations in the form described above are:
D'Arcy v Myriad Genetics Inc (2014) 224 FCR 479
Medium neutral citation (MNC):
Warner-Lambert Company LLC v Apotex Pty Ltd  FCAFC 59
Unreported judgment (pre-MNC):
Repatriation Commission v Smith (unreported, Federal Court of Australia, Sundberg J, 16 June 1997)
2.7 With respect to page and paragraph references at the end of citations, the Court prefers:
for example use: "at 481"
for example use: "at "
2.8 The Court prefers the following reports for citation:
- the Federal Court Reports (if the case has been reported in those reports); and
- authorised reports, rather than reports that are not authorised, for cases decided in other courts.
3. Filing and Serving the List
3.2 The respondent must file, and serve on each other party, the respondent's List no later than 4.00 pm, 4 business days before the hearing date.
3.3 Where a party defaults under paragraphs 3.1 or 3.2, any non-defaulting party must bring the default to the attention of the chambers of the judge hearing the matter (or the chambers of the presiding judge if there is more than one judge hearing the matter) so that appropriate orders may be made. At the same time, that party must also notify the other parties to the proceeding.
4. Supply of Authorities
4.1 The Court will supply, for the use of the judge or judges hearing the matter:
(a) up to (but not more than) 15 cases in Part "A" of the List that are reported in the Commonwealth Law Reports, Federal Court Reports, Australian Law Reports and the authorised reports of the Supreme Court of the State or Territory in which the application is to be heard. Where more than 15 cases are listed in Part "A" of the party's List, the party must identify with a single asterisk the 15 cases that the party wishes the Court to provide for the judge; and
(b) a copy of the current compilation of the legislation referred to in Part "A" of the List. A party wishing to refer to legislation as at a particular point of time (i.e. which is no longer the current version in force) must provide the judge (or each judge) with a copy of that legislation.
4.2 All other authorities must be supplied by the parties.
J L B ALLSOP
25 October 2016
To assist practitioners with citations and preparing Lists of Authorities, in this practice note:
are report series that contain judgments that have been reviewed by the judges or their associate, prior to the publication. They are therefore considered to be an accurate record of the judgment. The reports usually indicate in the opening pages of each volume that they are "authorised reports". Australian authorised report series:
are report series that are a legitimate record of court decisions. In some cases, the unauthorised report may be the only source for certain cases, particularly matters from local courts and tribunals. They can be "generalist" or "subject-specific" report series. Commonly used Unauthorised reports include: ALR, ALJR, FLR, Fam LR and NTR;
are decisions of courts that have not been published in a report series. The elements for citing an Unreported Judgment are:
means a Medium Neutral Citation, which is a citation assigned by a court or tribunal independent to any citation that commercial publishers may give to a judgment or decision. This format can be used for citing cases where there is no reported version and the Court has assigned an MNC. The elements for citing an MNC are:
A reference to legislation should include the:
 The Court may apply this practice note in an interlocutory hearing.
 In this practice note any reference to "applicant" is also intended to be a reference to an "appellant" with respect to appeals and a "plaintiff" with respect to corporations matters. Likewise, any reference to "respondent" is intended to refer to a defendant for corporations matters.
 NOTE: The ACTR Report Series between 1973 – 2008 is in the ALR
 NOTE: The NTR Report Series between 1979 – 1991 is in the ALR