No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 January 2025
The introduction of the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) (‘the HRA’), although contentious, is indicative of a move towards the introduction of bills of rights at State or Territory level in Australia. The HRA is modelled on the UK Human Rights Act and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, and has precipitated discussion in several States on the merits of introducing their own bills of rights, with Victoria enacting the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic).
However, one significant area of uncertainty, which has been given little consideration, is how the HRA (and equivalent legislation at State level) will operate within Australia's constitutional framework. Section 32 of the HRA enables the ACT Supreme Court to issue a ‘declaration of incompatibility’ when a provision of ACT legislation is incompatible with a right enunciated in the HRA. However, this declaration is intended to initiate ‘dialogue’ between the judiciary and the legislature: it does not invalidate the legislation, or affect the rights of the parties in the dispute in which the declaration is made. This article will address the constitutional limits that may be placed on the exercise of this novel ‘remedy’.
This article was originally submitted as an Honours Dissertation at the University of Adelaide. I would like to thank Professor John Williams for his comments and guidance in the preparation of this article. I would also like to thank Professor Geoffrey Lindell for his comments on earlier version of this paper.
1 See, eg, Bill Stefaniak, ‘Our Laws Are Enough', The Canberra Times (Canberra), 25 April 2002, 11; see also ACT Bill of Rights Consultative Committee, Towards an ACT Human Rights Act (2003) 17–21, 33–7, 39–41.
2 See, eg, ACT Bill of Rights Consultative Committee, above n 1, 38.
3 Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) c 42.
4 Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZ).
5 Australian Associated Press, NSW: Iemma Willing to Consider Charter of Rights Proposal (20 March 2006) ACT Human Rights Act Research Project <http://acthra.anu.edu.au/news/index.html> at 29 May 2006; Judy Jackson, ‘Human Rights Reference to Law Reform Institute’ (Press Release, 9 February 2006); Ben Spencer, ‘McGinty Considers Bill of Rights', The West Australian (Perth), 1 April 2006, 62; Nick Lenaghan, Victoria to Adopt Human Rights Charter (2 May 2006) ACT Human Rights Act Research Project <http://acthra.anu.edu.au/news/index.html> at 29 May 2006; contra Standing Committee on Law and Justice, Parliament of New South Wales, A NSW Bill of Rights (2001); Victorian Human Rights Consultation Committee, Draft Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (2005).
6 This article does not address the content of that Act; however, where sections of the HRA are discussed, references are provided to the equivalent sections in the Victorian Act.
7 Stellios, James, ‘Federal Dimensions to the ACT Human Rights Act’ (2005) 47 AIAL Forum 33Google Scholar; Standing Committee on Legal Affairs, ACT Legislative Assembly, Scrutiny of Bills and Subordinate Legislation Report No 42 (2004) 11–12.
8 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 32(2).
9 ACT Bill of Rights Consultative Committee, above n 1; Explanatory Memorandum, Human Rights Bill 2003 (ACT).
10 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 32(3).
11 Breavington v Godleman (1988) 169 CLR 41, 120–5 (Deane J); Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (1996) 189 CLR 51, 112–14 (McHugh J), 137–9 (Gummow J) ('Kable’); Abebe v Commonwealth (1999) 197 CLR 510, 559 (Gaudron J) ('Abebe’); Kruger v Commonwealth (1997) 190 CLR 1, 175 (Gummow J); Australian Law Reform Commission, The Judicial Power of the Commonwealth, Report No 92 (2001) [2.34], [2.67]; Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 479 (Kirby J).
12 Lipohar v The Queen (1999) 200 CLR 485, 500 (Gleeson CJ), 505–6 (Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ) ('Lipohar’); Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520, 563–7 (per curiam) ('Lange’).
13 John Pfeiffer Pty Ltd v Rogerson (2000) 203 CLR 503, 514, 518 (Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow and Hayne JJ) ('Pfeiffer’); Commonwealth v Mewett (1997) 191 CLR 471, 524–5 (Gaudron J) ('Mewett’).
14 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 68 (Brennan CJ), 96 (Toohey J), 101–2 (Gaudron J), 110 (McHugh J); Le Mesurier v Connor (1929) 42 CLR 481, 495–8 (Knox CJ, Rich and Dixon JJ); Federated Sawmill, Timberyard and General Woodworkers’ Employes’ Association (Adelaide Branch) v Alexander (1912) 15 CLR 308, 313 (Griffith CJ).
15 See, eg, Holmes v Angwin (1906) 4 CLR 297 ('Holmes’); C A MacDonald Ltd v The South Australian Railways Commissioner (1911) 12 CLR 221; cf Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 85–6 (Dawson J).
16 Malcolm Farr, ‘States Rights Push Wrong', The Daily Telegraph (Sydney), 7 April 2006, 17.
17 Australian Law Reform Commission, above n 11, [2.65].
18 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature 16 December 1966, 999 UNTS 171 (entered into force 23 March 1976).
19 R v Kirby; Ex parte Boilermakers’ Society of Australia (1956) 94 CLR 254 ('Boilermakers’ Case’).
20 In re Judiciary and Navigation Acts (1921) 29 CLR 257.
21 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51.
22 The judicial functions are fully set out in Part 4.
23 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 30(1); cf Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) s 32.
24 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 32(2); cf Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) s 36(2).
25 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 32(4); cf Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) s 36(4).
26 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 33(2); cf Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) s 37.
27 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 33(3); cf Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) s 37.
28 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 32(3); cf Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) s 36(5).
29 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) pt 3.
30 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 32(1); cf Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) s 36(1).
31 See, eg, Firestone v Australian National University [2004] ACTSC 76 (Unreported, Higgins CJ, 1 September 2004) [47]–[48]; Robertson v Australian Capital Territory [2005] ACTSC 35 (Unreported, Crispin J, 29 April 2005) [7]; Skaramuca v Craft [2005] ACTSC 61 (Unreported, Higgins CJ, 22 July 2005) [105]; IF v ACT Commissioner for Housing [2005] ACTSC 80 (Unreported, Crispin J, 26 July 2005) [59]–[62]; R v Khajehnoori [2005] ACTSC 76 (Unreported, Gyles J, 9 August 2005) [30].
32 R v YL [2004] ACTSC 115 (Unreported, Crispin J, 27 October 2004) [31], [79]; R v Trevitt [2005] ACTSC 48 (Unreported, Higgins CJ, 7 June 2005) [25]–[26]; In the Matter of an Application for the Adoption of TL [2005] ACTSC 49 (Unreported, Connolly J, 1 July 2005) [11]; SI bhnf CC v KS bhnf IS [2005] ACTSC 125 (Unreported, Higgins CJ, 2 December 2005) [23]; R v Caruso [2006] ACTSC 45 (Unreported, Crispin J, 15 May 2006) [30]; R v PJ [2006] ACTSC 37 (Unreported, Connolly J, 2 May 2006) [11]–[13].
33 See, eg, R v O'Neill [2004] ACTSC 64 (Unreported, Connolly J, 30 July 2004) [13], which cites s 24 to support the view that the protection from double jeopardy is deeply ensconced in law; Szuty v Smith [2004] ACTSC 77 (Unreported, Higgins CJ, 1 September 2004) [129], [131], which cites s 16 to support the availability of the defence of fair comment in defamation proceedings; SI bhnf CC v KS bhnf IS [2005] ACTSC 125 (Unreported, Higgins CJ, 2 December 2005) [72] and Stock v Hyde [2006] ACTSC 11 (Unreported, Connolly J, 3 February 2006) [18], which cite s 21 to support the principle of a right to due process; see also R v YL [2004] ACTSC 115 (Unreported, Crispin J, 27 October 2004) [90], [108]; A v Chief Executive of Department of Disability, Housing & Community Services [2006] ACTSC 43 (Unreported, Crispin J, 10 May 2006), which discusses the importance of the family unit.
34 See, eg, R v Martiniello [2005] ACTSC 9 (Unreported, Connolly J, 31 January 2005) [30] conferring a positive duty on the DPP to ensure sufficient evidence is available when the matter is set down for trial; In the Matter of an Application for the Adoption of TL [2005] ACTSC 49 (Unreported, Connolly J, 1 July 2005) [14] and R v Upton [2005] ACTSC 52 (Unreported, Connolly J, 1 July 2005) [10], [16]–[18], which held that judges must consider the HRA in exercising discretion conferred by statute; see also Fletcher v Harris [2005] ACTSC 27 (Unreported, Higgins CJ, 18 April 2005).
35 [2005] ACTSC 52 (Unreported, Connolly J, 1 July 2005).
36 R v Upton [2005] ACTSC 52 (Unreported, Connolly J, 1 July 2005) [24].
37 See, eg, Stock v Hyde [2006] ACTSC 11 (Unreported, Connolly J, 3 February 2006) [18]; R v Upton [2005] ACTSC 52 (Unreported, Connolly J, 1 July 2005) [19]–[24]. For further discussion of the developments in New Zealand and the UK, see Carolyn Evans, ‘Responsibility for Rights: The ACT Human Rights Act’ (2004) 32 Federal Law Review 291, 299, 303–4, 306–8.
38 Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) c 42, s 4.
39 See, eg, R v A [2002] 1 AC 45, 64–8 (Lord Steyn), cf 86–8 (Lord Hope).
40 Cf Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) c 42, s 10; Butler, Andrew, ‘Judicial Review, Human Rights and Democracy’ in Huscroft, Grant and Rishworth, Paul (eds), Litigating Rights: Perspectives from Domestic and International Law (2002) 47, 65–6Google Scholar.
41 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, opened for signature 4 November 1950, 213 UNTS 221, art 1 (entered into force 3 September 1953); see also Ian Leigh, ‘The UK's Human Rights Act 1998: An Early Assessment’ in Grant Huscroft and Paul Rishworth (eds), Litigating Rights: Perspectives from Domestic and International Law (2002) 323, 327–31; Butler, Andrew, ‘The Bill of Rights Debate: Why the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 is a Bad Model for Britain’ (1997) 17 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 323CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 339.
42 Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZ) ss 4, 5.
43 Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [2000] 2 NZLR 9, 17 (emphasis added); see also Quilter v A-G [1998] 1 NZLR 523, 554 (Thomas J); Manga v A-G of New Zealand [2000] 2 NZLR 65, 84 (Hammond J); Lord Steyn, ‘Democracy Through Law’ (Occasional Paper No 12, New Zealand Centre for Public Law, 2002) 16; contra Paul Rishworth, ‘Civil Remedies for Breach of the Bill of Rights’ in Paul Rishworth, Grant Huscroft, Scott Optican and Richard Mahoney (eds), The New Zealand Bill of Rights (2003) 811, 819.
44 Simpson v A-G (Baigent's Case) [1994] 3 NZLR 667, 698–9 (Hardie Boys J), see also at 676 (Cooke P).
45 See, eg, Simpson v A-G (Baigent's Case) [1994] 3 NZLR 667; Lange v Atkinson and ACP NZ Ltd [1997] 2 NZLR 22, 32 (Elias J); Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [2000] 2 NZLR 9; R v Goodwin (No 2) [1993] 2 NZLR 390; R v Poumaha [2000] 2 NZLR 695; cf R v Pora [2001] 2 NZLR 37; cf R v Shaheed [2002] 2 NZLR 377; Manga v A-G of New Zealand [2000] 2 NZLR 65; see also Victorian Human Rights Consultation Committee, Rights, Responsibilities and Respect: The Report of the Human Rights Consultation Committee (2005) 126–8; contra Rishworth, ‘Civil Remedies for Breach of the Bill of Rights', above n 43, 811, 819.
46 Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZ) preamble; Simpson v A-G (Baigent's Case) [1994] 3 NZLR 667, 676 (Cooke P), 691 (Casey J), 717–18 (McKay J), cf at 702 (Hardie Boys J); the New Zealand Court of Appeal considered Maharaj v A-G of Trinidad and Tobago (No 2) [1979] AC 385, 396, 399 (Lord Diplock); Nilabati Bahera v State of Orissa (1993) Cri LJ 2899, 2912 (Anand J) (Supreme Court of India); State (Quinn) v Ryan [1965] IR 70, 122 (Ó Dálaigh CJ) (Irish Supreme Court); Byrne v Ireland [1972] IR 241 (Walsh J) (Irish Supreme Court).
47 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) preamble, long title; Explanatory Memorandum, Human Rights Bill 2003 (ACT) 2; cf Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) s 1.
48 Cf Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZ) s 4; see, eg, Simpson v A-G (Baigent's Case) [1994] 3 NZLR 667, 693 (Hardie Boys J), 717 (McKay J); see also Butler, ‘The Bill of Rights Debate’ above n 41, 332, 334.
49 R v Upton [2005] ACTSC 52 (Unreported, Connolly J, 1 July 2005) [18]; see also Victorian Human Rights Consultation Committee, Rights, Responsibilities and Respect, above n 45, 116.
50 Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) c 42, s 6(3)(a); cf Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZ) s 3.
51 See, eg, Venables v News Group Newspapers [2001] 1 All ER 908, 917–18 (Butler-Sloss J); Douglas v Hello! Ltd [2001] 2 All ER 289, 320–4 (Sedley LJ); Anthony Lester and David Pannick (eds), Human Rights Law and Practice (1999) 31–2; Murray Hunt, ‘The Horizontal Effect of the Human Rights Act’ (1998) Public Law 423, 434–5; Vick, Douglas, ‘The Human Rights Act and the British Constitution’ (2002) 37 Texas International Law Journal 329Google Scholar, 358–61; Phillipson, Gavin, ‘The Human Rights Act, “Horizontal Effect” and the Common Law: A Bang or a Whimper?’ (1999) 62 Modern Law Review 824CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 826; Lord Steyn, above n 43, 14; Murray Hunt, ‘Human Rights Review and the Public–Private Distinction’ in Grant Huscroft and Paul Rishworth (eds), Litigating Rights: Perspectives from Domestic and International Law (2002) 73, 75–88; see also Solicitor-General v Radio New Zealand [1994] 1 NZLR 48; Duff v Communicado [1996] 2 NZLR 89; cf Paul Rishworth, ‘Liberty, Equality and the New Establishment’ in Grant Huscroft and Paul Rishworth (eds), Litigating Rights: Perspectives from Domestic and International Law (2002) 91, 97.
52 See also Evans, above n 37, 308; cf Victorian Human Rights Consultation Committee, Rights, Responsibilities and Respect: The Summary and Recommendations (2005) 12 (recommendation 31).
53 R v Davison (1954) 90 CLR 353, 380–2 (Kitto J); R v Trade Practices Tribunal; Ex parte Tasmanian Breweries Pty Ltd (1970) 123 CLR 361, 389–93 (Windeyer J); cf Vick, above n 51, 331–6; cf Paul Rishworth, ‘The Rule of International Law?’ in Grant Huscroft and Paul Rishworth (eds), Litigating Rights: Perspectives from Domestic and International Law (2002) 267, 269; contra Victorian Human Rights Consultation Committee, Summary and Recommendations, above n 52, 1.
54 See, eg, Stellios, above n 7.
55 Cf Butler, ‘The Bill of Rights Debate', above n 41, 336; cf Noort v MOT; Curran v Police [1992] 3 NZLR 260, 294 (Gault J).
56 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) ss 30, 32.
57 Cf Butler, ‘The Bill of Rights Debate', above n 41, 340, 344.
58 Explanatory Memorandum, Human Rights Bill 2003 (ACT); see also Victorian Human Rights Consultation Committee, Summary and Recommendations, above n 52, 3; cf Butler, ‘The Bill of Rights Debate', above n 41, 344.
59 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) ss 32, 33.
60 Explanatory Memorandum, Human Rights Bill 2003 (ACT) 7.
61 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 37.
62 Cf Butler, ‘The Bill of Rights Debate', above n 41, 326.
63 The potential administrative law implications of the HRA are discussed in Evans, above n 37, 302–4.
64 ACT Bill of Rights Consultative Committee, above n 1, 2, 5, 61–2; Explanatory Memorandum, Human Rights Bill 2003 (ACT).
65 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 33; Standing Committee on Legal Affairs, above n 7, 13.
66 Explanatory Memorandum, Human Rights Bill 2003 (ACT) 6; see also Victorian Human Rights Consultation Committee, Summary and Recommendations, above n 52, 10 (recommendation 21).
67 (1995) 183 CLR 273 ('Teoh’).
68 (1999) 197 CLR 510, 571 (Gummow and Hayne JJ).
69 (1997) 191 CLR 119, 126 (Brennan CJ, Dawson and Toohey JJ) ('Croome’).
70 (1921) 29 CLR 257, 366. The majority said that the legislature may prescribe the means by which the determination of the Court is to be obtained, and for that purpose may … adopt any existing method of legal procedure or invent a new one. But it cannot authorize this Court to make a declaration of the law divorced from any attempt to administer that law.
71 (1998) 195 CLR 424 ('Egan’).
72 Ibid 461 (McHugh J) (emphasis added), see also 466–7 (McHugh J); see also Bradlaugh v Gossett (1884) 12 QBD 271, 275 (Lord Coleridge CJ).
73 Egan (1998) 195 CLR 424, 446 (Gummow, Gaudron and Hayne JJ) (following R v Richards; Ex parte Fitzpatrick and Brown (1955) 92 CLR 157, 162), 460, 462–4 (McHugh J), 495 (Kirby J); 509 (Callinan J).
74 See, eg, Egan (1998) 195 CLR 424; see also Bradlaugh v Gossett (1884) 12 QBD 271.
75 Egan (1998) 195 CLR 424, 471 (McHugh J) emphasises the distinction between standing orders and legislation.
76 Prebble v Television New Zealand [1995] 1 AC 321, 337, cited with approval in Egan (1998) 195 CLR 424, 490 (Kirby J).
77 Egan (1998) 195 CLR 424, 451–2 (Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ), see also 492–3 (Kirby J).
78 See Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988 (Cth) s 24; Egan (1998) 195 CLR 424, 446–8.
79 Commonwealth v Queensland (1975) 134 CLR 298, 327 (Jacobs J).
80 In re Judiciary and Navigation Acts (1921) 29 CLR 257; see also Commonwealth v Queensland (1975) 134 CLR 298, 326 (Jacobs J); cf the approach in Canada: A-G (Ontario) v A-G (Canada) [1912] AC 571; cf Reference re Secession of Quebec [1998] 2 SCR 217; see also Grant Huscroft, ‘Rights, Bills of Rights, and the Role of Courts and Legislatures’ in Grant Huscroft and Paul Rishworth (eds), Litigating Rights: Perspectives from Domestic and International Law (2002) 3, 12.
81 In re Judiciary and Navigation Acts (1921) 29 CLR 257, 264 (emphasis added).
82 See, eg, Irving, Helen, ‘Advisory Opinions, the Rule of Law, and the Separation of Powers’ (2004) 4 Macquarie Law Journal 105Google Scholar, 105–6.
83 Leslie Zines, Federal Jurisdiction in Australia (3rd ed, 2002) 15. This would be consistent with the pre-Federation view that advisory opinions would be precluded because they were non-judicial: see Irving, above n 82, 109; Boilermakers’ Case (1956) 94 CLR 254, 272; contra Commonwealth v Queensland (1975) 134 CLR 298, 326–7 (Jacobs J).
84 Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1995) 183 CLR 245.
85 Cf Irving, above n 82, 111.
86 But see ibid 105–6.
87 See, eg, John Quick and Robert Garran, The Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth (1901) 720–1.
88 Abebe (1999) 197 CLR 510, 538 (Gleeson CJ and McHugh J); Ruhani v Director of Police (2005) 219 ALR 199, [289]–[292] (Callinan and Heydon JJ) ('Ruhani’); Waterside Workers’ Federation of Australia v J W Alexander Ltd (1918) 25 CLR 434, 451–3 (Barton J), 463 (Isaacs and Rich JJ); Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Munro (1926) 38 CLR 153, 176 (Isaacs J); Rola Co (Australia) Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1944) 69 CLR 185, 198–9 (Latham CJ, McTiernan J agreeing); Huddart Parker & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead (1909) 8 CLR 330, 357 (Griffith CJ).
89 Huddart Parker & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead (1909) 8 CLR 330, 357 (Griffith CJ); see also Australian Law Reform Commission, above n 11, 6; contra Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199, [13] (McHugh J).
90 Fencott v Muller (1983) 152 CLR 570, 608 (Mason, Murphy, Brennan and Deane JJ); Wilson v Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs (1996) 189 CLR 1, 11 ('Wilson’); but see Commonwealth v Queensland (1975) 134 CLR 298, 309, 315 (Gibbs CJ), 331 (Murphy J).
91 Shell Co of Australia v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1931] AC 275, 297.
92 See, eg, Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1995) 183 CLR 245, 257; following Precision Data Holdings Ltd v Wills (1991) 173 CLR 167, 188–9.
93 In re Judiciary and Navigation Acts (1921) 29 CLR 257, 264.
94 Explanatory Memorandum, Human Rights Bill 2003 (ACT) 6.
95 Ibid; see also Victorian Human Rights Consultation Committee, Rights, Responsibilities and Respect, above n 45, 114.
96 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 33; Explanatory Memorandum, Human Rights Bill 2003 (ACT) 6; the Standing Committee on Legal Affairs, above n 7, 2, describes the declaration as a ‘judicial power of review', see also 8, contra 11.
97 Cf Butler, ‘The Bill of Rights Debate', above n 41, 340; cf Rishworth, ‘The Rule of International Law?', above n 53, 267, 272; cf Victorian Human Rights Consultation Committee, Draft Charter, above n 5, s 31.
98 This is also relevant to whether the function is incompatible with the judicial function: Wilson (1996) 189 CLR 1, 25 (Gaudron J).
99 See, eg, Explanatory Memorandum, Human Rights Bill 2003 (ACT) 4.
100 Standing Committee on Legal Affairs, above n 7, 4–5, 9–10; see also Lord Steyn, above n 43, 14. For an example of courts interpreting rights and legislation by reference to practicality and social utility, see Classroom Crucifix Case (1995) 93 BverfGE 1 (German Constitutional Court), extracted and translated in Donald Kommers, The Constitutional Jurisprudence of the Federal Republic of Germany (2nd ed, 1997); R v Big M Drug Mart [1985] 1 SCR 295 (Canadian Supreme Court), extracted in Patrick Macklem et al, Canadian Constitutional Law (2nd ed, 1997); Government of the RSA v Grootboom (2001) (1) SA 46 (Constitutional Court of South Africa).
101 ACT Bill of Rights Consultative Committee, above n 1, 67–8.
102 (1906) 4 CLR 297.
103 Ibid 305.
104 Ibid 308; see also Webb v Hanlon (1939) 61 CLR 313, 323–5 (Starke J), 327–8 (Dixon J), 329–30 (Evatt J) ('Webb’).
105 Holmes (1906) 4 CLR 297, 306–7; see also Wilson (1996) 189 CLR 1, 8–9 (Brennan CJ, Dawson, Toohey, McHugh and Gummow JJ); cf Hilton v Wells (1985) 157 CLR 57, 67–74 (Gibbs CJ, Wilson and Dawson JJ).
106 Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) s 32.
107 ACT Bill of Rights Consultative Committee, above n 1, 67–8.
108 (1906) 4 CLR 297.
109 Ibid.
110 Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1995) 183 CLR 245, 258 (Mason CJ, Brennan and Toohey JJ); see also R v Davison (1954) 90 CLR 353, 369.
111 (1921) 29 CLR 257, 266 (Knox CJ, Gavan Duffy, Powers, Rich and Starke JJ); see above n 70 and accompanying text.
112 Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1995) 183 CLR 245, 257, 269 (Deane, Dawson, Gaudron and McHugh JJ); In re Judiciary and Navigation Acts (1921) 29 CLR 257, 264 (Knox CJ, Gavan Duffy, Powers, Rich and Starke JJ); cf Rishworth, ‘Civil Remedies for Breach of the Bill of Rights', above n 43, 811, 835.
113 Cf Commonwealth v Queensland (1975) 134 CLR 298, 310 (Gibbs CJ), 322, 326 (Jacobs J).
114 Re Ranger Uranium Mines Pty Ltd; Ex parte Federated Miscellaneous Workers’ Union of Australia (1987) 163 CLR 656, 666; see also Commonwealth v Queensland (1975) 134 CLR 298, 322 (Jacobs J).
115 Commonwealth v Queensland (1975) 134 CLR 298, 323 (Jacobs J).
116 Precision Data Holdings Ltd v Wills (1991) 173 CLR 167, 188–9.
117 Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1995) 183 CLR 245, 258 (Mason CJ, Brennan and Toohey JJ).
118 See Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1995) 183 CLR 245, 259 (Mason CJ, Brennan and Toohey JJ), considering Prentis v Atlantic Coast Line, 211 US 210, 226 (1908) (Holmes J); 268 (Deane, Dawson, Gaudron and McHugh JJ), considering R v Gallagher; Ex parte Aberdare Collieries Pty Ltd (1963) 37 ALJR 40, 43 (Kitto J).
119 See, eg, Stack v Coast Securities (No 9) Pty Ltd (1983) 154 CLR 261.
120 Wilson (1996) 189 CLR 1, 20 (Brennan CJ, Dawson, Toohey, McHugh and Gummow JJ).
121 Farr, above n 16; cf Australian Law Reform Commission, above n 11, [2.65]; see also McDonald, Stephen, ‘Territory Courts and Federal Jurisdiction’ (2005) 33 Federal Law Review 57CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 71.
122 Lipohar (1999) 200 CLR 485, 500 (Gleeson CJ), 505–6 (Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ); Lange (1997) 189 CLR 520, 563–7 (per curiam); Pfeiffer (2000) 203 CLR 503, 514, 518 (Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow and Hayne JJ); Mewett (1997) 191 CLR 471, 524–5 (Gaudron J).
123 Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199, [189]–[191] (Kirby J); Northern Territory v GPAO (1999) 196 CLR 553, 605 (Gaudron J) ('GPAO’); see also Re Governor, Goulburn Correctional Centre; Ex parte Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 341 (Gaudron), 356, 375 (Kirby J) ('Eastman’); cf McDonald, above n 121, 70.
124 Capital TV & Appliances Pty Ltd v Falconer (1971) 125 CLR 591 ('Falconer’); cf Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322 (Gummow and Hayne JJ).
125 Falconer (1971) 125 CLR 591, cited with approval in GPAO (1999) 196 CLR 553, 621 (McHugh and Callinan JJ); Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322; see also Porter v The King; Ex parte Yee (1926) 37 CLR 432, 438 (Knox CJ and Gavan Duffy J), 442–3 (Isaacs J), 449–50 (Starke J) ('Porter’); cf Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 356 (Kirby J).
126 See, eg, Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 346 (Gummow and Hayne JJ).
127 Peter Hanks, Patrick Keyzer and Jennifer Clarke, Australian Constitutional Law: Materials and Commentary (7th ed, 2004) ch 12, 1097; Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199, [176]–[177], [181], [184] (Kirby J); Porter (1926) 37 CLR 432, 440–1 (Isaacs J), 446 (Higgins J); contra 438 (Knox CJ and Gavan Duffy J).
128 See, eg, Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199, [194] (Kirby J); see also Tom Pauling, ‘The Constitutional Differences between Territories and States’ (2000) 20 Australian Bar Review 187, 190–2; cf, Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 377 (Kirby J); Zines, above n 83, 177; cf McDonald, above n 121, 77–8, 80–1.
129 Boilermakers’ Case (1956) 94 CLR 254, 275 (Dixon CJ, McTiernan, Fullagar and Kitto JJ).
130 Porter (1926) 37 CLR 432, 438 (Knox CJ and Gavan Duffy J); Re Wakim; Ex parte McNally (1999) 198 CLR 511; see also Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199, [5] (Gleeson CJ); Boilermakers’ Case (1956) 94 CLR 254, 270 (Dixon CJ, McTiernan, Fullagar and Kitto JJ); Commonwealth v Queensland (1975) 134 CLR 298, 328 (Jacobs J).
131 Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 337 (Gaudron J); Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199, [119] (Gummow and Hayne JJ); Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 426–8 (McHugh J).
132 See, eg, Lamshed v Lake (1958) 99 CLR 132, 144–5 (Dixon CJ), discussing Australian National Airways Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1945) 71 CLR 29. The majority in Lamshed rejected the broad proposition expounded in R v Bernasconi (1915) 19 CLR 629. See also Pauling, above n 128.
133 See, eg, Kruger v Commonwealth (1997) 190 CLR 1, 166 (Gummow J); the absence of these words was regarded as immaterial in Newcrest Mining (WA) Ltd v Commonwealth (1997) 190 CLR 513, 653 (Kirby J); see also Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 373 (Kirby J); Australian Law Reform Commission, above n 11, 621; Pauling, above n 128, 189–90; contra Porter (1926) 37 CLR 432, 446 (Higgins J); cf Newcrest Mining (WA) Ltd v Commonwealth (1997) 190 CLR 513, 580–1, 585 (McHugh J), 606–7 (Gummow J).
134 GPAO (1999) 196 CLR 553, 602 (Gaudron J); Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 426–8 (McHugh J); Spratt v Hermes (1965) 114 CLR 226, 274 (Windeyer J); see also Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 337 (Gaudron J), 354 (Kirby J); Australian Law Reform Commission, above n 11, 626–7; Pauling, above n 128.
135 Spratt v Hermes (1965) 114 CLR 226; Falconer (1971) 125 CLR 591; Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322.
136 Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1992) 177 CLR 106.
137 Capital Duplicators Pty Ltd v Australian Capital Territory (1992) 177 CLR 248, 268–84 (Brennan, Deane, Toohey and Gaudron JJ); see also Kruger v Commonwealth (1990) 190 CLR 1 (which doubted that section 116 applied to the Territories); R v Bernasconi (1915) 19 CLR 629 (s 80 does not apply); Newcrest Mining (WA) Ltd v Commonwealth (1997) 190 CLR 513 (s 51(xxxi) applies to Territories); contra Teori Tau v Commonwealth (1969) 119 CLR 564; see also Australian Constitution ss 92, 117; ACT Bill of Rights Consultative Committee, above n 1, [2.46]–[2.51]; not subject to s 55 of the Constitution in Buchanan v Commonwealth (1913) 16 CLR 315; the ability to provide for Territory representatives in the federal Parliament is not affected by Ch I: Western Australia v Commonwealth (1975) 134 CLR 201; Queensland v Commonwealth (1977) 139 CLR 585.
138 Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 331 (Gleeson CJ, McHugh and Callinan JJ).
139 (1915) 19 CLR 629.
140 (1965) 114 CLR 226.
141 See, eg, Spratt v Hermes (1965) 114 CLR 226, 243–8 (Barwick CJ).
142 (1999) 200 CLR 322.
143 Hanks, Keyzer and Clarke, above n 127, 1054.
144 Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988 (Cth).
145 See, eg, Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 332 (Gleeson CJ, McHugh and Callinan JJ).
146 See, eg, Porter (1926) 37 CLR 432, 441, 443 (Isaacs J), 448 (Rich J); Buchanan v Commonwealth (1913) 16 CLR 315; Teori Tau v Commonwealth (1969) 119 CLR 564.
147 Boilermakers’ Case (1956) 94 CLR 254, 290 (Dixon CJ, McTiernan, Fullagar, Kitto JJ); GPAO (1999) 196 CLR 553, 621–3 (McHugh and Callinan JJ); A-G (Cth) v The Queen [1957] AC 288, 320; Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 427 (McHugh J); cf Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199 [4] (Gleeson CJ).
148 See, eg, Capital Duplicators Pty Ltd v Australian Capital Territory (1992) 177 CLR 248, 272, (Brennan, Deane and Toohey JJ); see also Lamshed v Lake (1958) 99 CLR 132; Berwick Ltd v Grey (1976) 133 CLR 603; Kruger v Commonwealth (1997) 190 CLR 1; Newcrest Mining (WA) Ltd v Commonwealth (1997) 190 CLR 513; Spratt v Hermes (1965) 114 CLR 226, 270 (Menzies J); Pauling, above n 128.
149 See, eg, Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 349 (Gummow and Hayne JJ), 359 (Kirby J).
150 Ibid 382 (Kirby J); see GPAO (1999) 196 CLR 553, 618–21 (McHugh and Callinan JJ); see also Spratt v Hermes (1965) 114 CLR 226, 244 (Barwick CJ); Falconer (1971) 125 CLR 591, 605–6 (Menzies J); GPAO (1999) 196 CLR 553, 591 (Gleeson CJ and Gummow J).
151 See, eg, Spratt v Hermes (1965) 114 CLR 226, 257 (Kitto J), 265 (Menzies J); cf Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 340 (Gaudron J), 354–6 (Kirby J); Falconer (1971) 125 CLR 591, 598–600 (Barwick CJ); contra Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 427 (McHugh J).
152 Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 331 (Gleeson CJ, McHugh and Callinan JJ).
153 See, eg, Nauru (High Court Appeals) Act 1976 (Cth).
154 See, eg, Croome (1997) 191 CLR 119, 136 (Gaudron, McHugh and Gummow JJ); Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 421 (McHugh J); cf Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199 [5] (Gleeson CJ).
155 Cf Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199, [176]–[177] (Kirby J).
156 Ibid [148]–[172] (Kirby J).
157 Ibid; see also Australian Law Reform Commission, above n 11, 92.
158 Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199, [10] (Gleeson CJ), [108] (Gummow and Hayne JJ); cf [172] (Kirby J), [281]–[286] (Callinan and Heydon JJ), [51] (McHugh J).
159 Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 422 (McHugh J); Re Wakim; Ex parte McNally (1999) 198 CLR 511, 545–6 (Gleeson CJ), 558–9 (McHugh J), 575 (Gummow and Hayne JJ, Gaudron J agreeing); Zines, above n 83; Porter (1926) 37 CLR 432, 447 (Higgins J).
160 Capital Duplicators Pty Ltd v Australian Capital Territory (1992) 177 CLR 248; Falconer (1971) 125 CLR 591; cf GPAO (1999) 196 CLR 553; Hanks, Keyzer and Clarke, above n 127, 1093; cf the position of common law and existing legislation operating in the ACT by virtue of the Seat of Government Acceptance Act 1909 (Cth) and the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910 (Cth), summarised in O'Neill v Mann (2000) 101 FCR 160, 167–9.
161 Cf Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199, [39] (McHugh J).
162 Australian Constitution s 73(ii).
163 But see Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) ss 34, 35, 35A.
164 In re Judiciary and Navigation Acts (1921) 29 CLR 257, 265; Commonwealth v Queensland (1975) 134 CLR 298, 327 (Jacobs J).
165 In re Judiciary and Navigation Acts (1921) 29 CLR 257, 266.
166 See, eg, Mellifont v A-G (Qld) (1991) 173 CLR 289 ('Mellifont’), discussed in Zines, above n 83, 20.
167 But see McDonald, above n 121, 69.
168 Refer to Part Two.
169 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 35AA.
170 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 136–7 (Gummow J); see also Commonwealth v Queensland (1975) 134 CLR 298, 325 (Jacobs J) (discussion of Minister for Works (Western Australia) v Civil and Civil Pty Ltd (1967) 116 CLR 273, 277).
171 See, eg, Abebe (1999) 197 CLR 510, 555 (Gaudron J).
172 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 134 (Gummow J).
173 Ibid 106 (Gaudron J).
174 Ibid 103 (Gaudron J).
175 Refer to Part 3.
176 Boilermakers’ Case (1956) 94 CLR 254.
177 Quick and Garran, above n 87, 740; cf Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199, [163]–[172] (Kirby J), [38] (McHugh J); cf Eastman v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 1, 32–5, 40–1 (McHugh J); R v Commonwealth Court of Conciliation & Arbitration; Ex parte Brisbane Tramways Co Ltd (No 1) (1914) 18 CLR 54, 59–62 (Griffith CJ).
178 See, eg, Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199, [79] (McHugh J).
179 (1921) 29 CLR 257.
180 (1996) 189 CLR 51.
181 (1906) 4 CLR 297.
182 See above nn 67–70 and accompanying text.
183 Holmes (1906) 4 CLR 297, 304 (Griffith J).
184 See also Webb (1939) 61 CLR 313, 321–2 (Latham CJ).
185 See, eg, Lipohar (1999) 200 CLR 485, 500 (Gleeson CJ), 505–6 (Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ); Lange (1997) 189 CLR 520, 563–7 (per curiam); Pfeiffer (2000) 203 CLR 503, 514, 518 (Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow and Hayne JJ); Mewett (1997) 191 CLR 471, 524–5 (Gaudron J).
186 Mellifont (1991) 173 CLR 289, 299–300 (Mason CJ, Deane, Dawson, Gaudron and McHugh JJ); Saffron v The Queen (1953) 88 CLR 523, 527–8 (Dixon CJ); Commonwealth v Brisbane Milling Co Ltd (1916) 21 CLR 559, 577–80 (Higgins J); Webb (1939) 61 CLR 313, 319–20 (Latham CJ), 330 (Evatt J) (discussing Smith v Mann (1932) 47 CLR 426), 335 (McTiernan J); Victorian Railways Commissioner v McCartney and Nicholson (1935) 52 CLR 383; Medical Board of Victoria v Meyer (1937) 58 CLR 62.
187 Fisher v Fisher (1986) 161 CLR 438, 450 (Gibbs CJ, Wilson J agreeing); Webb (1939) 61 CLR 313, 319–21 (Latham CJ), 326 (Dixon J), 335 (McTiernan J).
188 Holmes (1906) 4 CLR 297; Webb (1939) 61 CLR 313, 319 (Latham CJ), 327–8 (Dixon J); cf Zines, above n 83, 20.
189 Webb (1939) 61 CLR 313, 321 (Latham CJ), 322 (Rich J).
190 Commonwealth v Brisbane Milling Co Ltd (1916) 21 CLR 559, 567 (Barton J), 577–80 (Higgins J); see also R v Snow (1915) 20 CLR 315, 355 (Higgins J).
191 (1921) 29 CLR 257.
192 Ibid 265.
193 Ibid 266.
194 Ibid 268, cf 275–6 (Higgins J).
195 Ibid 268.
196 Croome (1997) 191 CLR 119, 124–5 (Brennan CJ, Dawson and Toohey JJ) (emphasis added). See also Commonwealth v Queensland (1975) 134 CLR 298, 327 (Jacobs J); see also Abebe (1999) 197 CLR 510, 524 (Gleeson CJ and McHugh J), cf 555 (Gaudron J), 561 (Gummow and Hayne JJ); see also South Australia v Victoria (1911) 12 CLR 667, 674–5 (Griffith CJ); Collins v Charles Marshall Pty Ltd (1955) 92 CLR 529, 541–2 (Dixon CJ, McTiernan, Wilson, Webb, Fullagar and Kitto JJ); Fencott v Muller (1983) 152 CLR 570, 591 (Gibbs CJ).
197 Mellifont (1991) 173 CLR 289, 303 (Mason CJ, Deane, Dawson, Gaudron and McHugh JJ).
198 See, eg, Croome (1997) 191 CLR 119.
199 Ibid.
200 Criminal Code Act 1924 (Tas) sch 1.
201 The Court was in fact split 3:3 on the decision; the judgment in which the Chief Justice concurred will be referred to as the ‘majority’ judgment for convenience.
202 Croome (1997) 191 CLR 119, 125 (Brennan CJ, Dawson and Toohey JJ).
203 Ibid 126 (Brennan CJ, Dawson and Toohey JJ). The minority referred to the fact that the applicants were in breach of the criminal law of Tasmania (despite the DPP having stated in an affidavit that he would not prosecute Croome) and were also in breach of their lease agreement for their rental property, which had as a term of its contract that the applicants not engage in illegal activity on the premises: at 131–2 (Gaudron, McHugh and Gummow JJ).
204 Ibid 136 (Gaudron, McHugh and Gummow JJ).
205 Ibid.
206 Cf Abebe (1999) 197 CLR 510; cf Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 431–2 (McHugh J).
207 Zines states that ‘The rigour of this rule preventing the conferring on federal courts of power to give advisory opinions has been mitigated by the broad scope which the High Court has given to the declaratory judgment remedy in public law litigation': above n 83, 15–16.
208 See above nn 54–8 and accompanying text.
209 Abebe (1999) 197 CLR 510, 571 (emphasis added).
210 Croome (1997) 191 CLR 119, 127 (Brennan CJ, Dawson and Toohey JJ).
211 Abebe (1999) 197 CLR 510, 528.
212 [1703] 2 Ld Raym 938; (1703) 92 ER 126, 953 (Holt CJ); see also Victorian Human Rights Consultation Committee, Rights, Responsibilities and Respect, above n 45, 115.
213 See above nn 87–92 and accompanying text.
214 Rishworth, ‘Civil Remedies for Breach of the Bill of Rights', above n 43, 811.
215 Ruhani (2005) 219 ALR 199, [295] (Callinan and Heydon JJ); University of New South Wales v Moorhouse (1975) 133 CLR 1, 9–11 (Gibbs CJ); Forster v Jododex Australia Pty Ltd (1972) 127 CLR 421, 437–9 (Gibbs CJ).
216 Contra Standing Committee on Legal Affairs, above n 7, 12.
217 See, eg, Lindell, Geoffrey, ‘The Statutory Protection of Rights and Parliamentary Sovereignty: Guidance from the United Kingdom?’ (2006) 17 Public Law Review 188Google Scholar, 204–7.
218 Abebe (1999) 197 CLR 510, 525 (Gleeson and McHugh JJ), see also 589 (Kirby J).
219 Cf ibid 556–7 (Gaudron J), 591 (Kirby J).
220 Stack v Coast Securities (No 9) Pty Ltd (1983) 154 CLR 261, 278; Fencott v Muller (1983) 152 CLR 570; Abebe (1999) 197 CLR 510, 533–4 (Gleeson CJ and McHugh J); for a discussion of the extent of accrued jurisdiction see Zines, above n 83, 137–47.
221 Abebe (1999) 197 CLR 510, 530 (Gleeson CJ and McHugh J).
222 Stellios, above n 7.
223 Abebe (1999) 197 CLR 510, 547 (Gaudron J); Boilermakers’ Case (1956) 94 CLR 254, 271–2 (Dixon CJ, McTiernan, Fullagar and Kitto JJ).
224 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 78 (Dawson J).
225 See above nn 54–8 and accompanying text.
226 (1911) 12 CLR 221.
227 Ibid 232 (Barton J).
228 C A MacDonald Ltd v The South Australian Railways Commissioner (1911) 12 CLR 221; Webb (1939) 61 CLR 313, 319–20 (Latham CJ).
229 C A MacDonald Ltd v The South Australian Railways Commissioner (1911) 12 CLR 221.
230 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 94–6 (Toohey J), 100, 104 (Gaudron J), 116–17 (McHugh J).
231 Ibid 102–3 (Gaudron J), 112–14 (McHugh J), 137–9 (Gummow J), see also 479 (Kirby J); Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346.
232 North Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service Inc v Bradley (2004) 218 CLR 146; see also Hanks, Keyzer and Clarke, above n 127, 1094.
233 Cf Australian Law Reform Commission, above n 11, 620, 629–636; see also Stellios, above n 7, 36; Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) ss 39A, 69B; Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988 (Cth) s 48A; contra Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 68(2); see also McDonald, above n 121, 90–1.
234 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 95 (Toohey J) citing with approval Patrick Lane, The Australian Federal System (2nd ed, 1979) 446.
235 See, eg, Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 101 (Gaudron J).
236 See above nn 87–92 and accompanying text.
237 Baxter v Commissioner of Taxation (NSW) (1907) 4 CLR 1087, 1142 (Isaacs J); see also Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 422 (McHugh J); Anderson v Eric Anderson Radio & TV Pty Ltd (1965) 114 CLR 20, 30 (Kitto J); Lorenzo v Carey (1921) 29 CLR 243, 252 (Knox CJ, Gavan Duffy, Power, Rich and Starke JJ); Hanks, Keyzer and Clarke, above n 127, 1092; GPAO (1999) 196 CLR 553, 589–90 (Gleeson CJ and Gummow J); Australian Law Reform Commission, above n 11, 89–91; Peter Nygh and Peter Butt (eds), Butterworths Concise Australian Legal Dictionary (2nd ed, 1998).
238 See, eg, Agtrack v Hatfield (2005) 218 ALR 677, 683–4 (Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Gummow, Hayne and Heydon JJ).
239 See, eg, Hume v Palmer (1926) 38 CLR 441, 451 (Isaacs J).
240 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 94 (Toohey J), see also 136 (Gummow J); see also Felton v Mulligan (1971) 124 CLR 367, 372–3 (Barwick CJ), 402–4 (Walsh J).
241 The ACT is not a federal court within the meaning of s 71: Porter (1926) 37 CLR 432, 446 (Higgins J).
242 See, eg, Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 402–3 (Gaudron J); Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 338–9, 341 (Gaudron J), 347 (Gummow and Hayne JJ); cf Australian Law Reform Commission, above n 11, 101, 629–36; see also Stellios, above n 7, 34, 36; contra Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 68(2); see also Zines, above n 83; McDonald, above n 121.
243 See, eg, Australian Law Reform Commission, above n 11, 106; Pfeiffer (2000) 203 CLR 503; Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 402–3 (Gaudron J); GPAO (1999) 196 CLR 553, 604–5 (Gaudron J); Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 339–40 (Gaudron J), 347–9 (Gummow, Hayne JJ); cf Stack v Coast Securities (No 9) Pty Ltd (1983) 154 CLR 261.
244 Australian Constitution s 71.
245 North Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service Inc v Bradley (2004) 218 CLR 146, 162 (McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan and Heydon JJ) quoting Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337, 363 (Gaudron J); following GPAO (1999) 196 CLR 553, 603–4 (Gaudron J) and Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 336–40 (Gaudron J), 348 (Gummow and Hayne JJ), cf 354–6 (Kirby J).
246 North Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service Inc v Bradley (2004) 218 CLR 146, 162–3 (McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan and Heydon JJ) quoting Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337, 363 (Gaudron J).
247 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 104 (Gaudron J), 116, 118, 121 (McHugh J).
248 Ibid 98 (Toohey J), 107 (Gaudron J), 117 (McHugh J), 132 (Gummow J); see also Wilson (1996) 189 CLR 1, 11, 14 (Brennan CJ, Dawson, Toohey, McHugh and Gummow JJ).
249 (2006) 228 CLR 45 ('Forge’).
250 Ibid 75–6 (Gummow, Hayne and Crennan JJ), see also 121–2 (Kirby J).
251 Fardon v A-G (Qld) (2004) 223 CLR 575 ('Fardon’).
252 Ibid 601–2 (McHugh J).
253 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 134 (Gummow J); John Williams, ‘Inter-Constitutional Relations’ in Clement Macintyre and John Williams (eds), Peace, Order and Good Government (2003) 178.
254 Forge (2006) 228 CLR 45, 125 (Kirby J). The Kable principle was used by the Queensland Court of Appeal to invalidate a legislative provision in Re Criminal Proceeds Confiscation Act 2002 [2004] 1 Qd R 40
255 North Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service Inc v Bradley (2004) 218 CLR 146, 162 (McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan and Heydon JJ), referring to John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd v A-G (NSW) (2000) 181 ALR 694, 698 (Spigelman CJ); cf Hadba v The Queen [2004] ACTSC 62 (Unreported, Higgins CJ, Crispin and Gyles JJ, 27 July 2004), [15] (Higgins CJ and Crispin J); SI bhnf CC v KS bhnf IS [2005] ACTSC 125 (Unreported, Higgins CJ, 2 December 2005), [103]–[107].
256 See, eg, Fardon (2004) 223 CLR 575, 601–2 (McHugh J). In Forge (2006) 228 CLR 45, the Kable principle was considered in the context of the validity of a provision enabling the appointment of acting judges to the Supreme Court of New South Wales.
257 See above nn 170–1 and accompanying text; see, eg, Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 136–7 (Gummow J); Commonwealth v Queensland (1975) 134 CLR 298, 325 (Jacobs J); Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 421 (McHugh J).
258 Cf Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 420–1 (McHugh J)
259 See, eg, North Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service Inc v Bradley (2004) 218 CLR 146; Fardon (2004) 223 CLR 575, 591 (Gleeson CJ).
260 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 98 (Toohey J), 108 (Gaudron J), 119, 122 (McHugh J), 134 (Gummow J); Forge (2006) 228 CLR 45, 76 (Gummow, Hayne and Crennan JJ).
261 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 133 (Gummow J) quoting Mistretta v United States, 488 US 361, 407 (1989); Grollo v Palmer (1995) 184 CLR 348, 377–8 (McHugh J), 392 (Gummow J); see also Wilson (1996) 189 CLR 1, 8 (Brennan CJ, Dawson, Toohey, McHugh and Gummow JJ); Fardon (2004) 223 CLR 575, 615 (Gummow J), 647 (Hayne J, agreeing with Gummow J).
262 See, eg, Wilson (1996) 189 CLR 1, 10–16 (Brennan CJ, Dawson, Toohey, McHugh and Gummow JJ); Grollo v Palmer (1995) 184 CLR 348, 377–8 (McHugh J).
263 Contra Standing Committee on Legal Affairs, above n 7, 9.
264 (1996) 189 CLR 1, 17 (Brennan CJ, Dawson, Toohey, McHugh and Gummow JJ); cf Fardon (2004) 223 CLR 575, 621 (Gummow J).
265 Kable (1996) 189 CLR 51, 117 (McHugh J).
266 See Fardon (2004) 223 CLR 575, 591–3 (Gleeson CJ), 598 (McHugh J), 617–18, 621 (Gummow J), 647 (Hayne J, agreeing with Gummow J)), 653, 655–6 (Callinan and Heydon JJ).
267 Cf Forge (2006) 228 CLR 45, 68–9 (Gleeson CJ), 146–8 (Heydon J) where safeguards to protecting judicial independence and impartiality were considered relevant in evaluating the validity of the legislation.
268 See, eg, Pappas v Noble [2006] ACTSC 39 (Unreported, Master Harper, 27 April 2006) [17]–[18]; cf Fardon (2004) 223 CLR 575, 592 (Gleeson CJ).
269 Wilson (1996) 189 CLR 1, 17 (Brennan CJ, Dawson, Toohey, McHugh and Gummow JJ), 24 (Gaudron J).
270 Fardon (2004) 223 CLR 575, 617 (Gummow J), 647 (Hayne J, agreeing with Gummow J).
271 Wilson (1996) 189 CLR 1, 25 (Gaudron J).
272 Standing Committee on Legal Affairs, above n 7, 5–6.
273 Ibid; see also above nn 99–102 and accompanying text.
274 See, eg, Fardon (2004) 223 CLR 575; see also Williams, above n 253, 178.