Cunliffe & Anor v The Commonwealth of Australia

The High Court of Australia heard arguments in a matter involving The Commonwealth of Australia and Cunliffe. The proceedings concerned the interpretation and potential invalidity of certain provisions within migration legislation, specifically relating to the provision of "immigration assistance."

The central legal issues before the Court were the proper construction of the definition of "immigration assistance" under section 114B of the relevant Act, and whether this definition extended to casual or general advice given by individuals in the course of their professions or businesses, such as doctors, clergymen, butchers, or bakers. A further issue was whether, if the section was construed too broadly and thus invalid, the offending provisions were capable of severance from the rest of the Act.

The Commonwealth's submission focused on the meaning of "using or purporting to use knowledge of, or experience in, migration procedure" and the act of "advising" in relation to an entrance application. It was argued that the definition of "migration procedure" encompassed the relevant law and administrative practice. The Court was invited to consider dictionary definitions of "advice" and "advise" to understand the scope of the term. The submission contended that the legislation was intended to apply to individuals using or purporting to use special expertise in migration matters, rather than merely informing others based on general acquaintance, and that this interpretation would exclude many hypothetical scenarios that might otherwise raise questions of validity.