Wilkins, Stefanie --- "Constitutional Limits on Bills of Rights Introduced by a State or Territory" [2007] FedLawRw 17; (2007) 35(3) Federal Law Review 431

^[*] LLB (Hons), BE (Civil) (Hons), GDLP. 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] James Stellios, 'Federal Dimensions to the ACT Human Rights Act' [2005] AIAdminLawF 21; (2005) 47 AIAL Forum 33; 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] HCA 40; (1988) 169 CLR 41, 120–5 (Deane J); Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [1996] HCA 24; (1996) 189 CLR 51, 112–14 (McHugh J), 137–9 (Gummow J) ('Kable'); Abebe v Commonwealth [1999] HCA 14; (1999) 197 CLR 510, 559 (Gaudron J) ('Abebe'); Kruger v Commonwealth [1997] HCA 27; (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] HCA 25; (1997) 189 CLR 520, 563–7 (per curiam) ('Lange').

^[13] John Pfeiffer Pty Ltd v Rogerson [2000] HCA 36; (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] HCA 24; (1996) 189 CLR 51, 68 (Brennan CJ), 96 (Toohey J), 101–2 (Gaudron J), 110 (McHugh J); Le Mesurier v Connor [1929] HCA 41; (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] HCA 42; (1912) 15 CLR 308, 313 (Griffith CJ).

^[15] See, eg, Holmes v Angwin [1906] HCA 64; (1906) 4 CLR 297 ('Holmes'); C A MacDonald Ltd v The South Australian Railways Commissioner [1911] HCA 14; (1911) 12 CLR 221; cf Kable [1996] HCA 24; (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] HCA 10; (1956) 94 CLR 254 ('Boilermakers' Case').

^[20] In re Judiciary and Navigation Acts [1921] HCA 20; (1921) 29 CLR 257.

^[21] Kable [1996] HCA 24; (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; Andrew Butler, 'Judicial Review, Human Rights and Democracy' in Grant Huscroft and Paul Rishworth (eds), Litigating Rights: Perspectives from Domestic and International Law (2002) 47, 65–6.

^[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; Andrew Butler, '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 323, 339.

^[42] Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZ) ss 4, 5.

^[43] Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [1999] NZCA 329; [2000] 2 NZLR 9, 17 (emphasis added); see also Quilter v A-G [1997] NZCA 207; [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 [1999] NZCA 329; [2000] 2 NZLR 9; R v Goodwin (No 2) [1993] 2 NZLR 390; R v Poumaha [2000] NZCA 69; [2000] 2 NZLR 695; cf R v Pora [2000] NZCA 403; [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) [1978] UKPC 3; [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 [2000] EWCA Civ 353; [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; Douglas Vick, 'The Human Rights Act and the British Constitution' (2002) 37 Texas International Law Journal 329, 358–61; Gavin Phillipson, 'The Human Rights Act, "Horizontal Effect" and the Common Law: A Bang or a Whimper?' (1999) 62 Modern Law Review 824, 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 [1993] NZHC 423; [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] HCA 46; (1954) 90 CLR 353, 380–2 (Kitto J); R v Trade Practices Tribunal; Ex parte Tasmanian Breweries Pty Ltd [1970] HCA 8; (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] NZCA 51; [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] HCA 20; (1995) 183 CLR 273 ('Teoh').

^[68] [1999] HCA 14; (1999) 197 CLR 510, 571 (Gummow and Hayne JJ).

^[69] [1997] HCA 5; (1997) 191 CLR 119, 126 (Brennan CJ, Dawson and Toohey JJ) ('Croome').

^[70] [1921] HCA 20; (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] HCA 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] HCA 71; (1998) 195 CLR 424, 446 (Gummow, Gaudron and Hayne JJ) (following R v Richards; Ex parte Fitzpatrick and Brown [1955] HCA 36; (1955) 92 CLR 157, 162), 460, 462–4 (McHugh J), 495 (Kirby J); 509 (Callinan J).

^[74] See, eg, Egan [1998] HCA 71; (1998) 195 CLR 424; see also Bradlaugh v Gossett (1884) 12 QBD 271.

^[75] Egan [1998] HCA 71; (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] HCA 71; (1998) 195 CLR 424, 490 (Kirby J).

^[77] Egan [1998] HCA 71; (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] HCA 71; (1998) 195 CLR 424, 446–8.

^[79] Commonwealth v Queensland [1975] HCA 43; (1975) 134 CLR 298, 327 (Jacobs J).

^[80] In re Judiciary and Navigation Acts [1921] HCA 20; (1921) 29 CLR 257; see also Commonwealth v Queensland [1975] HCA 43; (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] HCA 20; (1921) 29 CLR 257, 264 (emphasis added).

^[82] See, eg, Helen Irving, 'Advisory Opinions, the Rule of Law, and the Separation of Powers' [2004] MqLawJl 6; (2004) 4 Macquarie Law Journal 105, 105–6.

^[83] Leslie Zines, Federal Jurisdiction in Australia (3^rd 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] HCA 10; (1956) 94 CLR 254, 272; contra Commonwealth v Queensland [1975] HCA 43; (1975) 134 CLR 298, 326–7 (Jacobs J).

^[84] Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [1995] HCA 10; (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] HCA 14; (1999) 197 CLR 510, 538 (Gleeson CJ and McHugh J); Ruhani v Director of Police [2005] HCA 42; (2005) 219 ALR 199, [289]–[292] (Callinan and Heydon JJ) ('Ruhani'); Waterside Workers' Federation of Australia v J W Alexander Ltd [1918] HCA 56; (1918) 25 CLR 434, 451–3 (Barton J), 463 (Isaacs and Rich JJ); Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Munro [1926] HCA 58; (1926) 38 CLR 153, 176 (Isaacs J); Rola Co (Australia) Pty Ltd v Commonwealth [1944] HCA 17; (1944) 69 CLR 185, 198–9 (Latham CJ, McTiernan J agreeing); Huddart Parker & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead [1909] HCA 36; (1909) 8 CLR 330, 357 (Griffith CJ).

^[89] Huddart Parker & Co Pty Ltd v Moorehead [1909] HCA 36; (1909) 8 CLR 330, 357 (Griffith CJ); see also Australian Law Reform Commission, above n 11, 6; contra Ruhani [2005] HCA 42; (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] HCA 18; (1996) 189 CLR 1, 11 ('Wilson'); but see Commonwealth v Queensland [1975] HCA 43; (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] HCA 10; (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] HCA 20; (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] HCA 18; (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 (2^nd ed, 1997); R v Big M Drug Mart 1985 CANLII 69; [1985] 1 SCR 295 (Canadian Supreme Court), extracted in Patrick Macklem et al, Canadian Constitutional Law (2^nd ed, 1997); Government of the RSA v Grootboom [2000] ZACC 19; (2001) (1) SA 46 (Constitutional Court of South Africa).

^[101] ACT Bill of Rights Consultative Committee, above n 1, 67–8.

^[102] [1906] HCA 64; (1906) 4 CLR 297.

^[103] Ibid 305.

^[104] Ibid 308; see also Webb v Hanlon [1939] HCA 8; (1939) 61 CLR 313, 323–5 (Starke J), 327–8 (Dixon J), 329–30 (Evatt J) ('Webb').

^[105] Holmes [1906] HCA 64; (1906) 4 CLR 297, 306–7; see also Wilson [1996] HCA 18; (1996) 189 CLR 1, 8–9 (Brennan CJ, Dawson, Toohey, McHugh and Gummow JJ); cf Hilton v Wells [1985] HCA 16; (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] HCA 64; (1906) 4 CLR 297.

^[109] Ibid.

^[110] Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [1995] HCA 10; (1995) 183 CLR 245, 258 (Mason CJ, Brennan and Toohey JJ); see also R v Davison [1954] HCA 46; (1954) 90 CLR 353, 369.

^[111] [1921] HCA 20; (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] HCA 10; (1995) 183 CLR 245, 257, 269 (Deane, Dawson, Gaudron and McHugh JJ); In re Judiciary and Navigation Acts [1921] HCA 20; (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] HCA 43; (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] HCA 63; (1987) 163 CLR 656, 666; see also Commonwealth v Queensland [1975] HCA 43; (1975) 134 CLR 298, 322 (Jacobs J).

^[115] Commonwealth v Queensland [1975] HCA 43; (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] HCA 10; (1995) 183 CLR 245, 258 (Mason CJ, Brennan and Toohey JJ).

^[118] See Brandy v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [1995] HCA 10; (1995) 183 CLR 245, 259 (Mason CJ, Brennan and Toohey JJ), considering Prentis v Atlantic Coast Line, [1908] USSC 160; 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] HCA 36; (1983) 154 CLR 261.

^[120] Wilson [1996] HCA 18; (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 Stephen McDonald, 'Territory Courts and Federal Jurisdiction' [2005] FedLawRw 3; (2005) 33 Federal Law Review 57, 71.

^[122] Lipohar (1999) 200 CLR 485, 500 (Gleeson CJ), 505–6 (Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ); Lange [1997] HCA 25; (1997) 189 CLR 520, 563–7 (per curiam); Pfeiffer [2000] HCA 36; (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] HCA 42; (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] HCA 10; (1971) 125 CLR 591 ('Falconer'); cf Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322 (Gummow and Hayne JJ).

^[125] Falconer [1971] HCA 10; (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] HCA 9; (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 (7^th ed, 2004) ch 12, 1097; Ruhani [2005] HCA 42; (2005) 219 ALR 199, [176]–[177], [181], [184] (Kirby J); Porter [1926] HCA 9; (1926) 37 CLR 432, 440–1 (Isaacs J), 446 (Higgins J); contra 438 (Knox CJ and Gavan Duffy J).

^[128] See, eg, Ruhani [2005] HCA 42; (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] HCA 10; (1956) 94 CLR 254, 275 (Dixon CJ, McTiernan, Fullagar and Kitto JJ).

^[130] Porter [1926] HCA 9; (1926) 37 CLR 432, 438 (Knox CJ and Gavan Duffy J); Re Wakim; Ex parte McNally (1999) 198 CLR 511; see also Ruhani [2005] HCA 42; (2005) 219 ALR 199, [5] (Gleeson CJ); Boilermakers' Case [1956] HCA 10; (1956) 94 CLR 254, 270 (Dixon CJ, McTiernan, Fullagar and Kitto JJ); Commonwealth v Queensland [1975] HCA 43; (1975) 134 CLR 298, 328 (Jacobs J).

^[131] Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 337 (Gaudron J); Ruhani [2005] HCA 42; (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] HCA 14; (1958) 99 CLR 132, 144–5 (Dixon CJ), discussing Australian National Airways Pty Ltd v Commonwealth [1945] HCA 41; (1945) 71 CLR 29. The majority in Lamshed rejected the broad proposition expounded in R v Bernasconi [1915] HCA 13; (1915) 19 CLR 629. See also Pauling, above n 128.

^[133] See, eg, Kruger v Commonwealth [1997] HCA 27; (1997) 190 CLR 1, 166 (Gummow J); the absence of these words was regarded as immaterial in Newcrest Mining (WA) Ltd v Commonwealth [1997] HCA 38; (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] HCA 9; (1926) 37 CLR 432, 446 (Higgins J); cf Newcrest Mining (WA) Ltd v Commonwealth [1997] HCA 38; (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] HCA 66; (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] HCA 66; (1965) 114 CLR 226; Falconer [1971] HCA 10; (1971) 125 CLR 591; Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322.

^[136] Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd v Commonwealth [1992] HCA 45; (1992) 177 CLR 106.

^[137] Capital Duplicators Pty Ltd v Australian Capital Territory [1992] HCA 51; (1992) 177 CLR 248, 268–84 (Brennan, Deane, Toohey and Gaudron JJ); see also Kruger v Commonwealth [1997] HCA 27; (1990) 190 CLR 1 (which doubted that section 116 applied to the Territories); R v Bernasconi [1915] HCA 13; (1915) 19 CLR 629 (s 80 does not apply); Newcrest Mining (WA) Ltd v Commonwealth [1997] HCA 38; (1997) 190 CLR 513 (s 51(xxxi) applies to Territories); contra Teori Tau v Commonwealth [1969] HCA 62; (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] HCA 29; (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] HCA 46; (1975) 134 CLR 201; Queensland v Commonwealth [1977] HCA 60; (1977) 139 CLR 585.

^[138] Eastman (1999) 200 CLR 322, 331 (Gleeson CJ, McHugh and Callinan JJ).

^[139] [1915] HCA 13; (1915) 19 CLR 629.

^[140] [1965] HCA 66; (1965) 114 CLR 226.

^[141] See, eg, Spratt v Hermes [1965] HCA 66; (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] HCA 9; (1926) 37 CLR 432, 441, 443 (Isaacs J), 448 (Rich J); Buchanan v Commonwealth [1913] HCA 29; (1913) 16 CLR 315; Teori Tau v Commonwealth [1969] HCA 62; (1969) 119 CLR 564.

^[147] Boilermakers' Case [1956] HCA 10; (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] HCA 42; (2005) 219 ALR 199 [4] (Gleeson CJ).

^[148] See, eg, Capital Duplicators Pty Ltd v Australian Capital Territory [1992] HCA 51; (1992) 177 CLR 248, 272, (Brennan, Deane and Toohey JJ); see also Lamshed v Lake [1958] HCA 14; (1958) 99 CLR 132; Berwick Ltd v Grey [1976] HCA 12; (1976) 133 CLR 603; Kruger v Commonwealth [1997] HCA 27; (1997) 190 CLR 1; Newcrest Mining (WA) Ltd v Commonwealth [1997] HCA 38; (1997) 190 CLR 513; Spratt v Hermes [1965] HCA 66; (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] HCA 66; (1965) 114 CLR 226, 244 (Barwick CJ); Falconer [1971] HCA 10; (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] HCA 66; (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] HCA 10; (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] HCA 5; (1997) 191 CLR 119, 136 (Gaudron, McHugh and Gummow JJ); Gould v Brown (1998) 193 CLR 346, 421 (McHugh J); cf Ruhani [2005] HCA 42; (2005) 219 ALR 199 [5] (Gleeson CJ).

^[155] Cf Ruhani [2005] HCA 42; (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] HCA 42; (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] HCA 9; (1926) 37 CLR 432, 447 (Higgins J).

^[160] Capital Duplicators Pty Ltd v Australian Capital Territory [1992] HCA 51; (1992) 177 CLR 248; Falconer [1971] HCA 10; (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] FCA 1180; (2000) 101 FCR 160, 167–9.

^[161] Cf Ruhani [2005] HCA 42; (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] HCA 20; (1921) 29 CLR 257, 265; Commonwealth v Queensland [1975] HCA 43; (1975) 134 CLR 298, 327 (Jacobs J).

^[165] In re Judiciary and Navigation Acts [1921] HCA 20; (1921) 29 CLR 257, 266.

^[166] See, eg, Mellifont v A-G (Qld) [1991] HCA 53; (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] HCA 24; (1996) 189 CLR 51, 136–7 (Gummow J); see also Commonwealth v Queensland [1975] HCA 43; (1975) 134 CLR 298, 325 (Jacobs J) (discussion of Minister for Works (Western Australia) v Civil and Civil Pty Ltd [1967] HCA 18; (1967) 116 CLR 273, 277).

^[171] See, eg, Abebe [1999] HCA 14; (1999) 197 CLR 510, 555 (Gaudron J).

^[172] Kable [1996] HCA 24; (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] HCA 10; (1956) 94 CLR 254.

^[177] Quick and Garran, above n 87, 740; cf Ruhani [2005] HCA 42; (2005) 219 ALR 199, [163]–[172] (Kirby J), [38] (McHugh J); cf Eastman v The Queen [2000] HCA 29; (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] HCA 15; (1914) 18 CLR 54, 59–62 (Griffith CJ).

^[178] See, eg, Ruhani [2005] HCA 42; (2005) 219 ALR 199, [79] (McHugh J).