Ainsworth v Criminal Justice Commission

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
Judgment Date1992
Neutral Citation[1992] HCA 10,1992-0409 HCA A
Date1992
Year1992
CourtHigh Court

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
577 cases
1 firm's commentaries
  • Damages on 'no-transaction' basis
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 25 December 2014
    ...McKenna; Hunter and New England Local Health District v Simon [2014] HCA 44 at [29]-[32] 15See Ainsworth v Criminal Justice Commission (1992) 175 CLR 564 at 581-582 per Mason CJ and Dawson, Toohey and Gaudron JJ. 16In Anjin No. 13 Pty Ltd v Allianz Australian Insurance Limited [2009] VSC 37......
15 books & journal articles
  • Griffith University V Tang, ‘Under an Enactment’ and Limiting Access to Judicial Review
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Federal Law Review No. 33-3, September 2005
    • 1 September 2005
    ...152 CLR 570,591, 603; Mellifont v Attorney-General (Qld) (1991) 173 CLR 289, 303, 316, 321–2; Ainsworth v Criminal Justice Commission (1992) 175 CLR 564 ('Ainsworth'), 582. 94 (2002) 209 CLR 372 ('Re McBain'). 95 Ibid 382 (Gleeson CJ), citing In re Judiciary and Navigation Acts (1921) 29 CL......
  • Judicial Review of Non-Statutory Executive Powers
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Federal Law Review No. 31-3, September 2003
    • 1 September 2003
    ...entirely. 88 See generally Wheeler, above n 36, 463–66; Brennan, above n 46, 26–27; Ainsworth v Criminal Justice Commission (1992) 175 CLR 564, 585 (Brennan J). 89 Craig v South Australia (1995) 184 CLR 163, 179; Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Yusuf (2001) 206 CLR 323,......
  • Litigation
    • United Kingdom
    • Construction Law. Volume III - Third Edition
    • 13 April 2020
    ...were discussed in Chapter 13. 606 he jurisdiction to grant a declaration is extremely wide: Ainsworth v Criminal Justice Commission (1992) 175 CLR 564; Smith v Coastivity Pty Ltd [2008] NSWSC 313 at [80], McDougall J. (“Well may we ask rhetorically of declarations as Homer Simpson asked of ......
  • Of Kings and Officers — The Judicial Development of Public Law
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Federal Law Review No. 33-2, June 2005
    • 1 June 2005
    ...of right is now seen as being within the inherent jurisdiction of a superior court: see Ainsworth v Criminal Justice Commission (1992) 175 CLR 564, 581–2. As such the remedy may not properly be described as 'equitable', being a remedy also available from a common law court. 109 See Lord Woo......
  • Get Started for Free