Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The case involved a re-argument of the High Court's decision in Western Australia v Commonwealth (1975), [2] in which the High Court had held legislation providing for Senate representation for the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory to be constitutionally valid.
Koowarta v Bjelke-Petersen, [1] was a significant court case decided in the High Court of Australia on 11 May 1982. It concerned the constitutional validity of parts of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975, and the discriminatory acts of the Government of Queensland in blocking the purchase of land by Aboriginal people in northern Queensland.
The argument against fixed four-year terms was supported by Katter's Australian Party. [6] KAP and other proponents of the "No" case stated that the proposal was wrong for a unicameral parliament without an upper house, and that voters would have to wait longer to vote out a "bad" government.
A majority (Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Gummow, Hayne, Callinan and Heydon JJ) of the High Court that heard this constitutional argument found the law valid. They held that a higher onus of proof on the Attorney-General was required in this case than the one in Kable i.e. high cogent evidence that the prisoner is a danger to the community.
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.
In 2013, Lex Wotton, as well as his wife Cecilia and Mother Agnes, filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of Indigenous Australian people who lived on Palm Island against the State of Queensland and the Commissioner of the Police Service, alleging that the police had committed acts of unlawful racial discrimination, in breach of section 9(1) of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) in the ...
Mabo v Queensland (No 1), [1] was a significant court case decided in the High Court of Australia on 8 December 1988. It found that the Queensland Coast Islands Declaratory Act 1985 , [ 2 ] which attempted to retrospectively abolish native title rights, was not valid according to the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 .
Wik Peoples v The State of Queensland [1] (commonly known as the Wik decision) is a decision of the High Court of Australia delivered on 23 December 1996, on whether statutory leases extinguish native title rights.