Re Judiciary and Navigation Acts explained

Court:	High Court of Australia
Date Decided:	1921

Re Judiciary & navigation Acts 1921 29 CLR 257 is a landmark judgment of the High Court of Australia. The matter related to what is a legal matter and the High Court's ability to issue opinion outside a case.^{[1] [2]}

Background

The Attorney-General of Victoria, raised an objection that section 88 of the Judiciary Act 1903 was beyond the powers of the Commonwealth Parliament.^[3]

Finding

The court found that, like in the United States, the Court could not issue legal opinion unattached to a specific case. The joint majority judgment stated:^{[4] [5]}

On the issue of what constituted a matter they said:^{[6] [7] [8]}

References

1. Helen Irving* "Advisory Opinions, The Rule Of Law, And The Separation Of Powers", Macquarie Law Journal (2004) Vol 4 105
2. John M. Williams, "Advisory Opinions: 'A Well-Covered Harbour'", Bond Law Review volume 22 | Issue 3 Article 13 p. 169.
3. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1921/20.html Re Judiciary Act 1903 and Navigation Act 1912
4. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1921/20.html Re Judiciary and Navigation Acts
5. [Robert French|Justice RS French]
6. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1921/20.html Re Judiciary and Navigation Acts
7. [Paul Kelly (journalist)#Personal life|Margaret Kelly]
8. Leslie Zines, Cowen and Zines's Federal Jurisdiction in Australia p. 16.