Lilley and Hayfield

In the matter of *Lilley and Hayfield*, heard before Gill J, the applicant sought final orders concerning matters 1a and 1b of their Initiating Application dated 27 June 2017. However, the court did not accept the application in respect of final orders sought under point 2.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's Initiating Application, filed on 27 June 2017, was properly before the court for final orders, specifically in relation to the distinct categories of relief sought. A further issue arose concerning the procedural requirements for matters involving the interpretation of the Australian Constitution.

The court's decision to accept the application for final orders 1a and 1b, but not for order 2, indicates a determination that the former fell within the court's jurisdiction or met the necessary threshold for final determination, while the latter did not. Furthermore, the court directed compliance with Section 78B of the *Judiciary Act 1903*, requiring notification to the relevant Attorneys-General when a matter arises under the Constitution or involves its interpretation, thereby acknowledging the constitutional dimension of the proceedings.

Consequently, the court ordered that the Initiating Application dated 27 June 2017 be accepted for filing in respect of final orders sought 1a and 1b, but not for final orders sought 2. The Listing Clerk was directed to allocate a date for the return of the application, and the applicant was ordered to comply with Section 78B of the *Judiciary Act 1903*.