Government of the Russian Federation v Commonwealth of Australia
Case
•
[2023] HCA 20
•26 June 2023
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Government of the Russian Federation v Commonwealth of Australia [2023] HCA 20
[2023] HCA 20
26 June 2023
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Federal Court of Australia, Jagot J considered an application by the Government of the Russian Federation (GRF) for interlocutory relief against the Commonwealth of Australia. The GRF sought declarations that the *Home Affairs Act 2023* (Cth) was constitutionally invalid, arguing it was not supported by a relevant head of legislative power and contravened section 51(xxxi) of the Constitution. Alternatively, the GRF sought a declaration that the Act resulted in an acquisition of its property otherwise than on just terms, making the Commonwealth liable to pay compensation.
The central legal issues before the court were whether the GRF had established a prima facie case or a serious question to be tried regarding the constitutional validity of the Act and its alleged impact on property rights. Furthermore, the court had to determine whether, on the balance of convenience, compelling circumstances existed to justify granting an interlocutory injunction to restrain the enforcement of the statute.
Jagot J found that a material change in circumstances had occurred between 2022 and the present application, namely the commencement of the *Home Affairs Act 2023* itself, which legislatively terminated the GRF's lease. The court noted that to establish a prima facie case, the GRF needed to demonstrate a sufficient likelihood of success to justify preserving the status quo. Citing *Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill* and *Castlemaine Tooheys Ltd v South Australia*, Jagot J emphasised that, in the absence of compelling grounds, courts must defer to legislative enactments until their invalidity is adjudged. The court concluded that the GRF had not established a prima facie case or a serious question to be tried, nor had it demonstrated compelling circumstances warranting an injunction to restrain the enforcement of the statute.
Consequently, the application filed on 23 June 2023 was dismissed, with the costs of that application to be costs in the cause.
The central legal issues before the court were whether the GRF had established a prima facie case or a serious question to be tried regarding the constitutional validity of the Act and its alleged impact on property rights. Furthermore, the court had to determine whether, on the balance of convenience, compelling circumstances existed to justify granting an interlocutory injunction to restrain the enforcement of the statute.
Jagot J found that a material change in circumstances had occurred between 2022 and the present application, namely the commencement of the *Home Affairs Act 2023* itself, which legislatively terminated the GRF's lease. The court noted that to establish a prima facie case, the GRF needed to demonstrate a sufficient likelihood of success to justify preserving the status quo. Citing *Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill* and *Castlemaine Tooheys Ltd v South Australia*, Jagot J emphasised that, in the absence of compelling grounds, courts must defer to legislative enactments until their invalidity is adjudged. The court concluded that the GRF had not established a prima facie case or a serious question to be tried, nor had it demonstrated compelling circumstances warranting an injunction to restrain the enforcement of the statute.
Consequently, the application filed on 23 June 2023 was dismissed, with the costs of that application to be costs in the cause.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Constitutional Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Injunction
-
Jurisdiction
-
Judicial Review
-
Standing
-
Statutory Construction
-
Costs
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Wayde v Western Suburbs Leagues Club Limited [2025] NSWSC 511
Cases Citing This Decision
3
Wayde v Western Suburbs Leagues Club Limited
[2025] NSWSC 511
Wayde v Western Suburbs Leagues Club Limited
[2025] NSWSC 511
Wayde v Western Suburbs Leagues Club Limited
[2025] NSWSC 511
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
2
Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill
[2006] HCA 46