Babet & Anor v Commonwealth of Australia; Palmer v Commonwealth of Australia

The High Court of Australia considered a dispute between the applicants, Babet and Palmer, and the respondent, the Commonwealth of Australia. The applicants sought to challenge the validity of certain provisions of the *Biosecurity Act 2015* (Cth) and the regulations made under it, which imposed restrictions on individuals seeking to enter Australia.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the impugned provisions of the *Biosecurity Act* and the associated regulations were invalid for impermissibly encroaching upon the implied freedom of political communication, and whether the Governor-General's exercise of power to make those regulations was invalid for failing to comply with the requirements of section 64 of the *Constitution*. The applicants also raised arguments concerning the proper construction of the *Biosecurity Act* and the scope of the executive power.

The Court ultimately held that the provisions of the *Biosecurity Act* and the regulations were valid. Gageler CJ, Gordon, Edelman, Steward, Gleeson, Jagot and Beech-Jones JJ jointly delivered reasons, finding that the restrictions imposed by the *Biosecurity Act* and the regulations did not infringe the implied freedom of political communication, as they were reasonably appropriate and adapted to the legitimate purpose of protecting public health. Furthermore, the Court determined that the Governor-General's exercise of power under section 64 of the *Constitution* was valid, as the regulations were made in accordance with the statutory authority conferred by the *Biosecurity Act*. The applications were dismissed.