"If you are not the registered holder on 29/04/2009, you are not...

"If you are not the registered holder on 29/04/2009, you are not liable."

My understanding of law is mainly from google searches, I don't have a legal background so wouldn't mind if anyone who did, stepped in here.

My understanding is that just because a judge says something doesn't make it a law. You have to consider the ranking of the court that made the finding, and whether it was 'obiter dicta' or 'ratio decendi'. (you can google these terms to find what they mean) So even though Justice Robson made those comments, I would think they'd at best only be a persuasive argument if the courts had to decide whether the instalments are a liability currently or only after a certain date. It would still seem to be very much an issue that's contendable.