Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The High Court was established following the passage of the Judiciary Act 1903. [3] Its authority derives from chapter III of the Australian Constitution, which vests it (and other courts the Parliament creates) with the judicial power of the Commonwealth. [4] Its internal processes are governed by the High Court of Australia Act 1979 (Cth). [5]
the court decided to adopt the High Court ruling in Mutual Life & Citizens' Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Evatt (1968) over the Privy Council decision which overruled the High Court. This re-affirmed the broad approach taken to statements of negligent misrepresentation. Koowarta v Bjelke-Petersen: 1982 153 CLR 168 Gibbs
Court: High Court of Australia: Full case name: Rowe & Anor v Electoral Commissioner & Anor : Decided: 6 August 2010 (order only) 15 December 2010 reasons and further orders: Citations [2010] HCA 46 (2010) 243 CLR 1: Transcripts: 4 Aug [2010] HCATrans 205 5 Aug [2010] HCATrans 205 Orders [2010] HCATrans 207: Court membership; Judges sitting
Palmer v Western Australia was a case heard by the High Court of Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic, which held that the Quarantine (Closing the Border) Directions and the authorising legislation, the Emergency Management Act 2005, were not impermissibly infringing section 92 of the Constitution of Australia.
Mabo v Queensland (No 2) (commonly known as the Mabo case or simply Mabo) is a landmark decision of the High Court of Australia that recognised the existence of Native Title in Australia. [1] It was brought by Eddie Mabo and others against the State of Queensland , and decided on 3 June 1992.
The High Court's decision was handed down on 12 October 2022, with its reasons published the same day. [8] In the published reasons, the Court asked why "If a person in the pool can become a representative party irrespective of their place of residence, as BHP accepts, why can a person in the pool become a group member only if resident in Australia?".
Minister of State for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh (commonly known as Teoh's case) [1] was an Australian court case which was decided by the High Court of Australia on 7 April 1995. The case is notable for giving unprecedented significance to the ratification of international treaties by the executive government (in particular the ...
Prior to the creation of the Federal Court of Australia in 1976, this was primarily the Supreme Courts of the States. Since 1976, a number of justices of the Federal Court have been appointed to the High Court. A small number of justices served on both a State Supreme Court and the Federal Court before being appointed to the High Court.