Category: Public Law

What a difference a Day makes: the High Court on disqualifying pecuniary interests of parliamentarians

In Re Day [No 2] [2017] HCA 14, the High Court determined that Mr Bob Day had an indirect pecuniary interest in an agreement with the Commonwealth, and was thereby disqualified from being chosen or sitting as a senator pursuant to s 44(v) of the Constitution. The Court’s decision substantially revised the ambit of that section.

Re Day [No 2] [2017] HCA 14

Unreasonableness and illogicality: a tale of two grounds

In recent decisions of the Federal Court (Wigney J) and the NSW Court of Appeal (Bathurst CJ), unreasonableness jurisprudence has been relied on to reject the argument that the “illogicality” ground of judicial review is solely concerned with the end result, as opposed to findings or reasoning “on the way”.

“Procedural” decisions and procedural fairness

The High Court has confirmed that the making of a “procedural” decision to consider exercising a non-compellable discretion to either grant a visa or to permit a further application for a protection visa (which decision has the effect of prolonging the mandatory detention of those affected) gives rise to an obligation to accord procedural fairness.

High Court: Civil forfeiture proceedings may need to await the finalisation of criminal proceedings

Case Note by Simona Gory. Civil forfeiture of asset proceedings may need to be stayed pending finalisation of the relevant criminal proceedings, at least in circumstances where the offences and circumstances relied on in the forfeiture proceeding are substantively identical to the criminal proceedings and there is no prejudice to the Commissioner arising from a delay to the forfeiture proceedings.