Plaintiff M61/2010E v Commonwealth explained

Plaintiff M61/2010E v Commonwealth
Date Decided:	11 November 2010
Full Name:	Plaintiff M61/2010E v Commonwealth of Australia; Plaintiff M69 of 2010 v Commonwealth of Australia
Citations:	.
Judges:	French CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell JJ^[1]

Plaintiff M61/2010E v Commonwealth of Australia; Plaintiff M69 of 2010 v Commonwealth of Australia is a decision of the High Court of Australia in its "original jurisdiction" under Section 75 of the Constitution of Australia. The plaintiffs^[2] were Sri Lankan citizens that had arrived at Christmas Island in 2010.^[3] They sought a declaration that they were not given the same procedural fairness as on-shore claimants.^[4] The court en banc ruled for the plaintiffs.^[1]

Notes and References

1. Plaintiff M61/2010E v Commonwealth of Australia; Plaintiff M69 of 2010 v Commonwealth of Australia . . .
2. The effect of the is that courts cannot name plaintiffs seeking protection visas in order to reduce the potential that the publication the applicants name may create further protection claims for people in Australia or put their families and colleagues overseas at risk of harm: Web site: Explanatory Memorandum.
3. News: The Law Report - M61 and M69. 23 November 2010. ABC Radio National. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. 20 September 2014.
4. Web site: Landmark cases in Australia - PLAINTIFFS M61 AND M69. State Library of New South Wales. 20 September 2014.