For better or worse, jurisdictional error is a concept that strikes at the heart of Australia’s constitutional system. Its meaning shapes the breadth of the courts’ jurisdiction to engage in judicial review. Though the High Court has recognised the difficulties inherent in distinguishing between jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional errors, the distinction has long been preserved. Whether...Read More

This article analyses High Court’s decision in Minister for Home Affairs v Benbrika [2021] HCA 4; 388 ALR 1; 95 ALJR 166, particularly the extent to which protective detention mechanisms are responsive to the federal judicial power. Specific focus is paid to the implications of the decision on the principle originally propounded by Brennan, Deane...Read More

Preliminary The writ of habeas corpus functions as a protector of liberty; enabling review by superior courts of the legality of custody or detention. The writ is intended to provide a swift and imperative remedy in all cases of illegal restraint or confinement. Fundamentally, physical control of a person’s detention or custody by a respondent...Read More

The decision in Commonwealth of Australia v Palmanova Pty Ltd [2024] FCAFC 90 concerned an appeal to the Full Federal Court of Australia. The appeal centred upon an issue of statutory interpretation, namely, the construction of s 14 of the Protection of Movable Cultural Heritage Act 1986 (Cth) (‘the Act’). That provision, concerning the forfeiture...Read More