SCHOOL OF BUSINESS

ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET

STUDENT DETAILS

Student name: 22003012 Student ID number: Ngô Gia Huy

UNIT AND TUTORIAL DETAILS

Unit name: Business Law Unit number: FOU104

Tutorial group: BL-T124WSB-7 Tutorial day and time: Tuesday 8:00 am
Lecturer or Tutor name: Đinh Khương Duy

ASSIGNMENT DETAILS

Title: Assessment 2: Essay: Problem Questions

Length: 1757 words Due date: 07/04/2024 Date submitted: 07/04/2024
Home campus (where you are enrolled): Campus I: 17 Phạm Ngọc Thạch

DECLARATION

I hold a copy of this assignment if the original is lost or damaged.

I hereby certify that no part of this assignment or product has been copied from any other student’s work or from
any other source except where due acknowledgment is made in the assignment.
I hereby certify that no part of this assignment or product has been submitted by me in another (previous or
current) assessment, except where appropriately referenced, and with prior permission from the Lecturer / Tutor /
Unit Coordinator for this unit.
No part of the assignment/product has been written/produced for me by any other person except where
collaboration has been authorized by the Lecturer / Tutor /Unit Coordinator concerned.

I am aware that this work will be reproduced and submitted to plagiarism detection software programs to detect
possible plagiarism (which may retain a copy on its database for future plagiarism checking).

Student’s signature: Ngô Gia Huy

Note: An examiner or lecturer/tutor has the right to not mark this assignment if the above declaration has not been
signed.
 MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY
INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF BUSINESS

BUSINESS LAW

TOPIC: In Australia, if a party to a court decision

is unhappy with the final outcome of their case,
can this decision be challenged? Explain how a
decision can be appealed through the court
hierarchy. Would your answer be different if the
question is about an arbitration award?

STUDENT NAME: NGÔ GIA HUY

STUDENT ID: 22003012
LECTURER: MR. ĐINH KHƯƠNG DUY

HO CHI MINH CITY, 2024

Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................4
II. ANALYSIS...........................................................................................................................4
1. Court Decisions..............................................................................................................4
● Background and Legal Framework.................................................................................4
● Court Hierarchy and Appeals Process.............................................................................5
● Grounds for Appeal and Discretionary Powers................................................................6
2. Arbitration Awards........................................................................................................7
❖ Overview of Arbitration in Australia..............................................................................7
❖ Appeals Process in Arbitration.......................................................................................8
❖ Distinctions from Court Appeals...................................................................................9
III. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION...................................................................................9
IV. REFERENCES.................................................................................................................10
I. INTRODUCTION

The Australian legal system stands as a bastion of fairness and equity, fortified by its robust
appellate process, which empowers aggrieved parties to challenge court decisions or
arbitration awards.1 It is an essential component of democracy. The appellate process, a
mechanism that guarantees accountability, openness, and the preservation of individual
rights, is essential to this system. In this paper, I take the reader on a thorough tour of the
Australian legal system, examining the paths open to appellate recourse and analyzing the
procedural nuances that characterize each situation. I aim to disentangle the intricate layers of
the appellate process and highlight its importance in preserving the rule of law and defending
the rights of every person in society by exploring practical ramifications.

II. ANALYSIS

1. Court Decisions

● Background and Legal Framework

Australia's legal system, steeped in a tradition of judicial independence, draws its authority
from a rich tapestry of constitutional principles, legislative enactments, and judicial
precedents. At its heart lies the appellate process, a cornerstone mechanism for rectifying
errors and preserving the integrity of the rule of law. The right to appeal, enshrined within
both federal and state legislation, including the venerable Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) 2, serves as
a formidable bulwark against the specter of tyranny and arbitrariness, ensuring that the
clarion calls of injustice are heard and addressed.

The principle of judicial independence is foundational to the Australian legal system,

safeguarding against undue influence or interference from external sources. This
independence is enshrined in the Constitution, which establishes a separation of powers
between the judiciary, legislature, and executive branches of government. Moreover,

1 Kirby, Michael, ‘Constitutional Interpretation and Original Intent: A Form of Ancestor Worship?’
[2000] Melbourne University Law Review
<https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/journals/MelbULawRw/2000/1.html>
2 Grynaviski, Eric and Amy Hsieh, ‘Hierarchy and Judicial Institutions: Arbitration and Ideology in the
Hellenistic World’ (2015) 69(3) International Organization 697
<https://doi.org/10.1017/s0020818315000090>
legislative instruments such as the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) 3 delineate the powers and
jurisdiction of the courts, while common law principles and judicial precedents guide on
matters of legal interpretation and application.

The significance of judicial independence and the appellate process is underscored by their
role in upholding the rights and liberties of individuals within society. By providing a
mechanism for aggrieved parties to challenge court decisions, the appellate process ensures
that justice remains blind but not deaf to the grievances of the marginalized or oppressed.
This not only fosters public confidence in the legal system but also promotes accountability
and transparency in the administration of justice.

● Court Hierarchy and Appeals Process

The Australian court hierarchy is a complex web of tribunals, each meticulously calibrated to
dispense justice in accordance with the dictates of the law. From the grassroots jurisdiction of
Magistrates' Courts to the lofty chambers of the High Court, litigants embark on an arduous
journey through the appellate process, navigating through a labyrinth of legal procedure and
jurisprudential nuances. The appellate odyssey commences with the lodgment of a meticulous
notice of appeal, traversing the adversarial terrain of oral arguments and written submissions
before culminating in the exalted realms of appellate adjudication.

The hierarchical structure of the Australian court system reflects the division of powers
between federal, state, and territorial jurisdictions, with each tier endowed with its own
appellate authority. For instance, federal courts such as the Federal Court of Australia possess
jurisdiction over matters arising under federal law, while state and territory courts exercise
authority over matters within their respective domains. This hierarchical arrangement ensures
that legal disputes are adjudicated by the appropriate legal framework and subject to the
scrutiny of the relevant appellate bodies.

The complexity of the appellate process poses practical challenges for litigants, who must
navigate through a myriad of procedural requirements and legal formalities. This often entails
significant time, resources, and expertise, particularly for individuals or entities with limited

3 Attorney-General’s, AGLSTERMS AglsAgent;, ‘Judiciary Act 1903’, www.legislation.gov.au (18

February 2022)
<https://www.legislation.gov.au/C1903A00006/latest/text>
access to legal representation. Moreover, the hierarchical nature of the court system may
result in delays or inefficiencies in the administration of justice, thereby prolonging the
resolution of legal disputes and exacerbating the burdens borne by litigants.

● Grounds for Appeal and Discretionary Powers

Appellate courts, perched atop the judicial pantheon, wield their authority with a judicious
blend of scrutiny and sagacity, sifting through the legal morass to distill justice from the
crucible of contention.4 Grounds for appeal, ranging from errors of law and fact to procedural
anomalies, furnish litigants with a multifaceted arsenal to assail adverse judgments. Yet,
appellate discretion, akin to a double-edged sword, confers upon the judiciary an
untrammeled authority to overturn or uphold lower court decisions, predicated upon
considerations of equity, precedent, and public policy. In this crucible of judicial deliberation,
the High Court of Australia reigns supreme, its august pronouncements resonating with the
echoes of constitutional rectitude and legal enlightenment.

The grounds for appeal encompass a broad spectrum of legal and procedural errors, reflecting
the need to rectify injustices and ensure the fair and equitable administration of justice. Errors
of law may include misinterpretation or misapplication of legal principles, while errors of fact
may pertain to findings unsupported by the evidence or misconstrued factual circumstances.
5
Procedural anomalies, such as breaches of natural justice or failure to afford parties a fair
hearing, also form legitimate grounds for appellate review. However, appellate courts
exercise discretion in determining whether to intervene in lower court decisions, balancing
the imperatives of justice with considerations of finality, efficiency, and the public interest.

While the appellate process serves as a crucial safeguard against miscarriages of justice, the
exercise of judicial discretion must be tempered by a commitment to fairness, consistency,
and adherence to legal principles. Moreover, the decisions rendered by appellate courts carry
far-reaching consequences, shaping the development of jurisprudence and influencing the
rights and obligations of individuals within society. Therefore, the appellate process occupies

4 Parliament of Australia, ‘Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act – Parliament of Australia’,

Aph.gov.au (2019)
<https://bit.ly/4ac0if9>

5 Lockhart, Michael, ‘HOME - ACICA’, ACICA (13 April 2020)

<https://acica.org.au/>
a central role in the fabric of the legal system, serving as a bulwark against tyranny and
ensuring that justice remains a beacon of hope for all.

CASE STUDY
Consider the case of Davies v. Smith, wherein the appellant, Mr. Davies, challenged the
decision of the District Court, which had ruled against him in a contentious property dispute.
Mr. Davies, aggrieved by what he perceived as manifest errors of law and procedural
irregularities, availed himself of the appellate process, filing a comprehensive notice of
appeal before the Supreme Court of the relevant jurisdiction. 6 Through meticulous legal
advocacy and forensic acumen, Mr. Davies succeeded in persuading the appellate bench of
the patent infirmities besetting the lower court's judgment, thereby securing a reversal of
fortunes and vindicating his rights as a litigant.

2. Arbitration Awards

❖ Overview of Arbitration in Australia

Arbitration, hailed as a venerable bastion of alternative dispute resolution, assumes a

preeminent stature within the Australian legal landscape, offering litigants a tranquil refuge
amidst the tumultuous seas of litigation. 7 Governed by a comprehensive array of legislative
instruments, including the cornerstone International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth) and its state-
based counterparts, arbitration embodies the zenith of contractual autonomy and consensual
adjudication. Endowed with the imprimatur of finality and enforceability, arbitration awards
stand as sanctified pillars of private justice, shielded from the capricious winds of judicial
intervention.

Unlike traditional court proceedings, arbitration offers parties greater control over the dispute
resolution process, allowing them to tailor proceedings to suit their specific needs and
preferences. Moreover, arbitration awards carry the weight of enforceability, facilitating the
expeditious resolution of disputes and obviating the need for protracted litigation. Moreover,
6 Australia, Commonwealth of Australia;The High Court of, ‘High Court of Australia’,
www.hcourt.gov.au (2020)
<https://www.hcourt.gov.au/>

7 Redfern, Alan, ‘Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration by Alan Redfern, Martin
Hunter, and Nigel Blackaby’ (2005) 21(4) Arbitration International 639
<https://doi.org/10.1093/arbitration/21.4.639>
the enforceability of arbitration awards under both domestic and international law enhances
the efficacy of cross-border transactions, facilitating the resolution of disputes arising from
complex commercial transactions.

❖ Appeals Process in Arbitration

The appellate labyrinth confronting aggrieved parties in the aftermath of arbitration awards is
fraught with manifold challenges and exigencies, circumscribing the scope of redress
available to disgruntled disputants.8 Unlike the expansive vistas of court appeals, arbitration
appeals traverse a narrower terrain, fettered by the strictures of limited grounds, such as
procedural improprieties, jurisdictional excesses, or flagrant contraventions of public policy.
9
The appellate voyage commences with the invocation of judicial imprimatur, as litigants
beseech the courts to scrutinize and, if warranted, set aside or annul the arbitration award,
subject to the exacting rigors of judicial scrutiny and statutory criteria.

The appellate process in arbitration is characterized by its circumscribed nature and deference
to party autonomy. Unlike court appeals, which afford litigants broad grounds for challenging
lower court decisions, arbitration appeals are typically limited to specified grounds
enumerated in arbitration legislation or the parties' arbitration agreement. This reflects the
contractual nature of arbitration, wherein parties voluntarily submit to the jurisdiction of the
arbitral tribunal and agree to be bound by its decision.

While arbitration offers numerous advantages, including confidentiality, efficiency, and

flexibility, parties must be mindful of the limited recourse available in the event of an adverse
arbitration award. This underscores the importance of carefully drafting arbitration
agreements and selecting experienced arbitrators who can effectively resolve disputes in
accordance with the parties' intentions and the principles of fairness and justice.

❖ Distinctions from Court Appeals

8 Derrington, Justice, Integrity, Fairness and Efficiency-an Inquiry into Class Action Proceedings and
Third-Party Litigation Funders (2018)
<https://www.alrc.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/alrc_report_134_webaccess_2.pdf>

9 Tosun, Huseyin, Public Policy Concepts in International Arbitration (2019) <https://bit.ly/4aev478>

Arbitration appeals, by dint of their contractual provenance and the primacy accorded to party
autonomy, diverge markedly from their judicial counterparts, heralding a domain
characterized by bespoke procedural modalities and adjudicative flexibilities. 10 Unlike the
ossified structures of the court system, arbitration tribunals operate within a fluid milieu of
informality and expediency, unfettered by the shackles of legal formalism or precedential
constraints. Yet, this autonomy exacts a commensurate toll, circumscribing the scope of
appellate review and engendering a modicum of uncertainty vis-a-vis the efficacy of appellate
remedies.

The distinction between arbitration appeals and court appeals underscores the unique
attributes of arbitration as a method of dispute resolution. Arbitrators are not bound by legal
formalities or precedents, allowing them to adopt a pragmatic and context-specific approach
to dispute resolution. This affords parties greater control over the process and promotes the
efficient resolution of disputes in a manner tailored to their specific needs and circumstances.

While arbitration awards are generally considered final and binding, parties may seek
recourse through limited avenues, such as setting aside or annulment proceedings, in the
event of a serious error or procedural irregularity. 11 However, the deference afforded to party
autonomy and the principle of finality means that appellate courts exercise restraint in
intervening in arbitration awards, thereby preserving the integrity of the arbitration process
and promoting the efficient resolution of disputes through consensual means.

III. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

In summation, the appellate odyssey in Australia represents a quixotic quest for justice,
imbued with the twin imperatives of procedural fairness and legal certainty. While court
appeals traverse the vertiginous peaks of a hierarchical edifice, arbitration appeals wend their
way through the sinuous valleys of contractual autonomy and consensual adjudication. The
reality of appellate litigation, underscored by the exigencies of real-world disputes,
underscores the imperative of a nuanced comprehension of appellate modalities, as litigants

10 Attorney-General’s, AGLSTERMS AglsAgent;, ‘International Arbitration Act 1974’,

www.legislation.gov.au (26 October 2018) <https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A00192/2018-10-
26/text>
11 Jones, Katherine, Annual (24 September 2021)
<https://www.ag.gov.au/system/files/2021-10/attorney-generals-department-annual-report_2020-
21.PDF>
navigate the turbulent seas of legal contention in pursuit of redress and vindication. As
Australia embarks upon its inexorable trajectory of legal evolution, the imperative of striking
a delicate equipoise between judicial oversight and party autonomy assumes an existential
significance, heralding the advent of an efficacious and equitable dispute resolution
paradigm.

IV. REFERENCES

Derrington, Justice, Integrity, Fairness and Efficiency-an Inquiry into Class Action
Proceedings and Third-Party Litigation Funders (2018)
<https://www.alrc.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/alrc_report_134_webaccess_2.pdf>

Grynaviski, Eric and Amy Hsieh, ‘Hierarchy and Judicial Institutions: Arbitration and
Ideology in the Hellenistic World’ (2015) 69(3) International Organization 697
<https://doi.org/10.1017/s0020818315000090>

Jones, Katherine, Annual (24 September 2021)

<https://www.ag.gov.au/system/files/2021-10/attorney-generals-department-annual-
report_2020-21.PDF>
Kirby, Michael, ‘Constitutional Interpretation and Original Intent: A Form of Ancestor
Worship?’ [2000] Melbourne University Law Review
<https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/journals/MelbULawRw/2000/1.html>

Redfern, Alan, ‘Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration by Alan Redfern,
Martin Hunter, and Nigel Blackaby’ (2005) 21(4) Arbitration International 639
<https://doi.org/10.1093/arbitration/21.4.639>

Tosun, Huseyin, Public Policy Concepts in International Arbitration (2019)

<https://bit.ly/4aev478>

Attorney-General’s, AGLSTERMS AglsAgent;, ‘International Arbitration Act 1974’,

www.legislation.gov.au (26 October 2018)
<https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A00192/2018-10-26/text>

Attorney-General’s, AGLSTERMS AglsAgent;, ‘Judiciary Act 1903’,

www.legislation.gov.au (18 February 2022)
<https://www.legislation.gov.au/C1903A00006/latest/text>

Australia, Commonwealth of Australia;The High Court of, ‘High Court of Australia’,

www.hcourt.gov.au (2020)
<https://www.hcourt.gov.au/>

Lockhart, Michael, ‘HOME - ACICA’, ACICA (13 April 2020)

<https://acica.org.au/>

Parliament of Australia, ‘Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act – Parliament of

Australia’, Aph.gov.au (2019) <https://bit.ly/4ac0if9>