Australian Tribunals (Friday 6 November 2026)

Send us Fan Mail Fourteen decisions from the Patent Office and four state tribunals in the Tribunals edition of Friday 6 November 2026, four with headnotes and four more worked examples from synopses. Whether spittle washed off at once is a bodily injury under Queensland's victims of crime scheme; how far back a tenant's mould claim can reach; two patent oppositions, one over a krill oil blend; and worked examples on land tax, a building inspector's photographs, a very big shed and teacher discipline. Tribunals Desk: spittle and bodily injury (lead; headnoted). Downey v Victim Assist Queensland [2026] QCAT 519 - spitting on an officer on duty is a crime for the scheme though no one was charged; "bodily injury" needs a physical effect on the body, harm a necessary ingredient; "directly results" means close in time, and a consensual blood test did not directly result. Decision under review confirmed. JADE Tribunals Desk: mould and a continuing breach (headnoted). Wang v McKay [2026] NSWCATAP 348 - a continuing breach accrues daily, so the three-month limit bites day by day; a whole-tenancy award without considering an extension was an error of law; failure to address material issues is a question of law; a landlord's loss does not depend on proof of repairs; bring the transcript. Appeal allowed in part; claims remitted. JADE Tribunals Desk: patent oppositions (headnoted). Metrol Technology Limited v Expro North Sea Limited [2026] APO 35 - amendment opposition: onus on the opponent; no added matter where nothing new can be learned from the specification as filed; a narrowing amendment passes the infringement test; s 102(2)(b) reaches only deficiencies the amendment causes. Opposition unsuccessful; amendments allowed. JADE Pharmazen Limited v Pharmalink International Limited [2026] APO 33 - green-lipped mussel and krill oil ratios: a range without technical significance confers no novelty; in vitro synergy not shown in vivo. Opposition upheld (novelty, most claims; inventive step, all claims); submissions on an opportunity to amend to come. JADE Tribunals Desk: worked examples from synopses (frameworks; no outcomes stated). Mifsud v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2026] NSWCATAD 342 - the s 10AA Land Tax Management Act 1956 (NSW) dominant use factors; onus on the taxpayer; no actual sales needed, but no evidence of expected sale values can be fatal. JADE Dixonbuild Pty Ltd v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2026] QCAT 518 - directions to rectify: the Standards and Tolerances Guide is persuasive, not binding; photos taken closer than the 1.5 m viewing position got little weight; later rectification and sale bear on the discretion. JADE Swan v West Tamar Council [2026] TASCAT 145 - is a large shed an outbuilding: purpose-based characterisation, ancillary use, de novo appeals, the expert as advocate, precedent permit conditions. JADE Queensland College of Teachers v CAH [2026] QCAT 520 - teacher discipline framework only: the Briginshaw standard, renumbered grounds, partial admissions and contemporaneous documents, structured sanction factors. JADE Registry (list only; by subject; no outcome): Zonnevylle v Secretary, Department of Education [2026] NSWCATAP 351 (appeal grounds); <a href='https://jade.io/ar