Ceremonial - QCs

The High Court of Australia considered the question of whether the appointment of Queen's Counsel (QC) in Queensland was a matter for the executive government or the judiciary. The dispute arose from the Queensland government's decision to cease the practice of appointing QCs, which had been a long-standing tradition. The applicants, who were senior barristers, sought declarations that the government's actions were unlawful and that the power to appoint QCs resided with the judiciary.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the prerogative power to appoint QCs, as exercised by the Queensland government, was subject to judicial review or if it fell outside the scope of such review. The court was required to determine the constitutional basis for the appointment of QCs and whether this power was inherently judicial or executive in nature. This involved an examination of the historical development of the QC appointment process in Queensland and its relationship with the broader constitutional framework of the state.

The High Court, by majority, held that the appointment of QCs was an executive function, not a judicial one. Their Honours reasoned that the historical practice, while significant, did not alter the fundamental nature of the power. The court found that the power to grant titles and honours, including that of Queen's Counsel, was vested in the executive government. Consequently, the court concluded that the Queensland government was not acting unlawfully in ceasing the practice of appointing QCs, as it was within its executive prerogative to do so.