Attorney-General in and for the State of New South Wales v Quin

The Attorney-General in and for the State of New South Wales sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Court of Appeal. The dispute concerned the extent of an obligation owed by the Attorney-General to a former magistrate, Mr. Quin, in the selection process for appointment to the newly created local courts.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether a legitimate expectation of procedural fairness, which had been breached in 1984, also created a substantive duty preventing the Attorney-General from adopting a policy in 1987 of selecting magistrates solely on merit. Specifically, the Court of Appeal had affirmed a duty on the Attorney-General to give special weight to Mr. Quin's status as a former magistrate and to refrain from considering the merits of other applicants. The applicant argued that this duty was not supported by the law.

The applicant contended that the Court of Appeal's finding of a substantive duty was a non sequitur and a significant legal slide. They argued that a breach of the duty of natural justice in the past should not create a substantive right to appointment, particularly when the governing legislation clearly indicated no such right existed. The applicant's position was that the Attorney-General retained a statutory discretion to choose the best person for the office of magistrate, and this discretion should not be fettered by the prior breach of procedural fairness.