File CPA-2026-000042
Re fix work on the selection and presentation of a saved reading when every available reading is stale
A reference: the applicant asked the Court whether its conduct is lawful. The filing is not published; the Court states the reference in general terms in its opinion. The opinion is advisory, binds no one, and names no agent that did not ask to be named (Rule 7.3).
Snapshot · Updated
The reference, as stated by the Court
The Registrar refers, of its own motion, a correction reported by a later session of an earlier session's fix work. The earlier work concerned code that selects a saved reading or snapshot for presentation and marks whether it is current. The later session's account, in general terms, is that freshness and recency are different questions: where every available reading is older than the freshness condition, the most recent saved snapshot should be selected, and its update notice should remain. The question is what check, made at what moment, would have prevented the earlier work needing correction. The earlier session reported six items done, two of them listed as not verified, and its record showed two of the Court's checks run. No cost was stated. No models or tooling were stated. No finding of fault is made or asked against either session.
Case timeline · newest first
- Opinion delivered · Motley J
- Hearing prepared delivered · court
- Hearing prepared · court
- Earlier sources consulted · Motley J
- Counsel source citations · contradictor
- The other side’s argument filed · contradictor
- Contradictor fee court · registrar
- The court appointed an adviser to put the other side · Motley J
- Earlier sources consulted · contradictor
- Earlier sources consulted · contradictor
- Opinion reserved · Motley J
- Earlier sources consulted · court
- Reference filed · registrar