Garlett v The State of Western Australia & Anor

This matter came before the High Court of Australia concerning an application by Mr Garlett for the removal of part of an appeal pending in the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The respondents were the State of Western Australia and the Attorney-General for the State of Western Australia. The dispute centred on whether certain provisions of the *High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020* (WA) contravened Chapter III of the Commonwealth Constitution.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was to clarify the precise scope of the appeal sought to be removed. Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the removal application pertained to the entirety of the appeal or only a specific part, and whether the constitutional challenge related to one or both of the offences listed in Schedule 1 of the *High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020* (WA). The court also needed to confirm whether Mr Garlett was an appellant or an applicant for leave to appeal in the Court of Appeal.

The High Court, through its questioning, clarified that Mr Garlett sought the removal of only paragraph (a) of the declaratory orders made by Justice Corboy, which concerned the constitutional validity of the *High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020* (WA) under Chapter III. It was further established that the challenge was limited to item 34 of Schedule 1, relating to robbery, and not item 35 concerning assault with intent to rob. The court also confirmed that Mr Garlett was indeed an appellant, not an applicant for leave to appeal, as the order under challenge was final.

The High Court ordered the removal of that part of the cause pending in the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia in which Peter Robert Garlett had appealed against paragraph (a) of the declaration made by Justice Corboy on 12 November 2021, specifically concerning the constitutional validity of the *High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020* (WA) as it applied to a serious offender convicted of robbery (item 34 of Schedule 1). The court also set out a timetable for the filing of submissions and other documents in preparation for the hearing of the removed matter.