Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In October 1964 the Air Navigation Regulations (Cth), [2] were amended to make them apply to intrastate air navigation by the enactment of regulation 6(1)(f). [3] Regulation 198 prohibited the use of an aircraft in regular public transport operations except pursuant to a licence issued by the Director-General of Civil Aviation, who, according to regulation 199(4), will have regard to the ...
AustLII was established in 1995. [1] [2] Founded as a joint program of the University of Technology Sydney and the University of New South Wales law schools, its initial funding was provided by the Australian Research Council. [3] Its public policy purpose is to improve access to justice through access to legal information. [4]
The King of Australia: His Majesty King Charles III [1] The Governor-General of Australia: Her Excellency the Hon Sam Mostyn AC; The Governor of the State when within their own State. The Governors of the other (or all) States in order of appointment: Governor of New South Wales: Margaret Beazley (2 May 2019) Governor of Tasmania: Barbara Baker ...
Prior to the Act, the succession to the throne of Australia, like all Commonwealth realms, was controlled by a system of male-preference primogeniture, [8] under which succession passed first to the monarch's or nearest dynast's legitimate sons (and to their legitimate issue) in order of birth, and subsequently to their daughters and their legitimate issue, again in order of birth, so that ...
In an important constitutional case (Sue v Hill (1999) 163 ALR 648), three justices of the High Court of Australia (the ultimate court of appeal) expressed the view that if the British Parliament were to alter the law of succession to the throne, such a change could not have any effect on the monarchy in Australia, because of the Australia Act ...
The Act was the second of the 1st Parliament in its first session and "the first substantive Commonwealth act to be enacted.". [4]: 22 fn 43 When introduced in 1901, the Act was modelled on and adopted many of the rules set out in the Interpretation Act 1889 and also adopted "some of the special provisions of the New South Wales Interpretation Act of 1897".
New South Wales v Commonwealth (also called the WorkChoices case) [1] is a landmark decision of the High Court of Australia, which held that the federal government's WorkChoices legislation [2] was a valid exercise of federal legislative power under the Constitution of Australia.
These commonly involve actions by persons bound to act pursuant to some form of devolved legislation; such as environmental regulations or rental tenancy regulations. A table of the court hierarchy and civil and administrative tribunals of the Australian states and territories follows here: