Your World of Legal Intelligence
 Australia | 1-800-335-6202

Smith v Western Australia

Judgment Cited authorities 86 Cited in 82 Precedent Map Related
Vincent
JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
JudgeFrench CJ.,Hayne J.,Heydon J.,Crennan,Kiefel JJ.,Bell J.
Judgment Date27 February 2013
Neutral Citation2013-0227 HCA B,[2013] HCA 3
CourtHigh Court
Docket NumberA16/2012
Date27 February 2013
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
53 cases
  • Burgess v Commonwealth of Australia
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 20 May 2020
    ...Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago v Ramanoop [2005] 2 WLR 1324; [2006] 1 AC 328 Attorney-General (SA) v Adelaide City Corporation [2013] HCA 3; (2013) 249 CLR 1 Blatch v Archer (1774) 1 Cowp 63; (1774) 98 ER 969 Burgess v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 69; (......
  • Tajjour v State of New South Wales
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 8 October 2014
    ...Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Wills (1992) 177 CLR 1 at 31 per Mason CJ; [1992] HCA 46; Attorney-General (SA) v Adelaide City Corporation (2013) 249 CLR 1 at 31–32 [43] per French CJ, 67–68 [151]–[152] per Heydon J; [2013] HCA 3. See also Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, (1769)......
  • Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 8 May 2013
    ...as a criterion for the validity of delegated legislation see Attorney-General (SA) v Corporation of the City of Adelaide (2013) 87 ALJR 289; 295 ALR 197; [2013] HCA 83 Airo-Farulla, ‘Reasonableness, rationality and proportionality’, in Groves and Lee (eds), Australian Administrative Law: ......
  • Clubb v Edwards
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 10 April 2019
    ...31; Mulholland v Australian Electoral Commission (2004) 220 CLR 181 at 245–246 [182]; Attorney-General (SA) v Adelaide City Corporation (2013) 249 CLR 1 at 37 [54]; [2013] HCA 3; Monis v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 92 at 206–207 [324]. See and compare Cox v Louisiana (1965) 379 US 536 at 553–5......
    • Request a trial to view additional results
3 firm's commentaries
  • Coastal Management SEPP survives an early legal challenge
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 19 January 2020
    ...not pressed 6 State of South Australia v Tanner (1989) 166 CLR 161 at 167 7 Attorney-General (SA) v Corporation of the City of Adelaide (2013) 249 CLR 1 at This publication does not deal with every important topic or change in law and is not intended to be relied upon as a substitute for le......
  • There's just no place for a street preaching man: unreasonableness and subordinate legislation
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 22 July 2013
    ...Can subordinate legislation be challenged on the basis it is unreasonable? In Attorney-General (SA) v Corporation of the City of Adelaide [2013] HCA 3, the High Court was asked to strike down subordinate legislation on this The by-law and the preacher The legislation in question was a by-la......
  • Local Laws and election advertising – A Constitutional question?
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 25 November 2015
    ...of the purpose sought to be achieved by the legislation. The High Court in Attorney-General (SA) v Corporation of the City of Adelaide [2013] HCA 3 applied the proportionality test to a local law which limited that freedom by preventing 'canvassing, preaching, or haranguing' on public land ......
22 books & journal articles
  • The Engineers Case Centenary: SCOTUS and the Origins of Australia's Scabrous Constitutional Signature
    • United Kingdom
    • British Journal of American Legal Studies No. 10-1, April 2021
    • 1 April 2021
    ...from the 536 Id. at ¶ 30. 537 Id. at ¶ 37. 538 Id. at ¶ 79. 539 Id. at ¶ 116. 540 Attorney-General (SA) v Corp of the City of Adelaide (2013) 249 CLR 1 (Austl.). 541 Banerji v Bowles [2013] FCCA 1052 (9 August 2013) (Austl.). 10 Br. J. Am. Leg. Studies (2021) way in which the respondent put......
  • The Ethos of Protection for Freedom of Religion or Belief in Australian Law
    • Australia
    • University of Western Australia Law Review No. 47-1, January 2020
    • 1 January 2020
    ...243 CLR 506; Unions NSW v State of New South Wales (2013) 88 ALJR 227; Attorney-General (SA) v Corporation of the City of Adelaide (2013) 249 CLR 1; McCloy v New South Wales [2015] HCA 34; Brown v Tasmania [2017] HCA 43; Clubb v Edwards; Preston v Avery [2019] HCA 11. 50 Comcare v Banerji [......
  • A PURPOSIVE APPROACH TO INTERPRETING AUSTRALIA'S COMPLEMENTARY PROTECTION REGIME.
    • Australia
    • 1 December 2019
    ...Minister for Immigration and Citizenship). (170) Simms (n 147) 131 (Lord Hoffmann), quoted in A-G (SA) v Adelaide City Corporation (2013) 249 CLR 1, 66 [148] (Heydon J). See also Gabrielle Appleby and Alexander Reilly, 'Unveiling the Public Interest: The Parameters of Executive Discretion i......
  • Contracts and the Implied Freedom of Political Communication
    • United Kingdom
    • Federal Law Review No. 49-1, March 2021
    • 1 March 2021
    ...Commission (2004) 220 CLR 181, 223–4 (McHugh J), 246 (Gummow and Hayne JJ);Attorney-General (SA) v City of Adelaide Corp oration (2013) 249 CLR 1, 89 (Crennan and Ki efel JJ) (‘City ofAdelaide’); Monis v The Queen (n 3) 129 (French CJ); Wotton v Queensland (n 3) 31 (Kiefel J).79. Unions NSW......
    • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT