A-G v Fardon

The case of A-G v Fardon was heard by the High Court of Australia, where the central issue was whether the Queensland Parliament's decision to grant itself immunity from judicial review of its legislative processes was valid. The Attorney-General of Queensland, the respondent, challenged this legislative immunity, arguing it contravened the separation of powers doctrine. The appellant, Fardon, a former member of the Queensland Parliament, intervened to support the Attorney-General's position, asserting that such immunity could not be granted to the Parliament as it would undermine the rule of law and judicial independence.

The legal issues that the court had to decide included the extent of legislative immunity, whether the Parliament could immunise itself from judicial scrutiny, and whether such immunity was consistent with the Constitution. The court had to examine the separation of powers principle and the balance between legislative privilege and the power of the judiciary to ensure the Constitution was upheld. The primary question was whether the Parliament could effectively immunise itself from judicial review of its legislative processes, and if such an act would infringe upon the fundamental constitutional framework.

The High Court concluded that the Queensland Parliament's attempt to grant itself immunity from judicial review was invalid. The court held that the legislative branch could not immunise itself from judicial scrutiny as it would compromise the separation of powers doctrine. The court emphasised that the Constitution requires a balance between the powers of the different branches of government, and judicial review is a critical mechanism to ensure this balance. The court found that the legislative immunity provision was an invalid attempt to encroach upon the judiciary's power, thereby violating the Constitution. This decision reinforced the principle that the judiciary's role in maintaining the separation of powers is essential to the rule of law.

The final orders of the court were that the Queensland Parliament's legislation granting itself immunity from judicial review was unconstitutional and invalid. The court's decision underscored the importance of maintaining the separation of powers and the judiciary's role in upholding the Constitution. The ruling ensured that the legislative branch could not shield itself from judicial scrutiny, thereby preserving the integrity of the Australian constitutional framework.