Motor Traffic (Alcohol and Drugs) (Amendment) Act 1985 (ACT)

In the Australian Capital Territory, the Motor Traffic (Alcohol and Drugs) (Amendment) Ordinance 1985 was challenged on the basis that the ordinance was invalid because it had not been approved by the Governor-General, and the ordinance had not been referred to the Australian Capital Territory Advisory Council as required by section 50 of the Seat of Government Act 1922 (Cth). The court had to decide whether the ordinance was validly made and whether the failure to refer the ordinance to the Advisory Council rendered it invalid.

The court held that the ordinance was validly made as it was within the legislative powers of the Australian Capital Territory. The court also held that the failure to refer the ordinance to the Advisory Council did not render it invalid as the requirement to refer legislation to the Advisory Council was not mandatory and did not affect the validity of the legislation. The court further held that the failure to refer the ordinance to the Advisory Council did not result in the ordinance being invalid as the requirement to refer legislation to the Advisory Council was not mandatory and did not affect the validity of the legislation.

The court dismissed the challenge to the validity of the ordinance and held that the ordinance was validly made. The court further held that the failure to refer the ordinance to the Advisory Council did not render it invalid.