Optometrists (Amendment) Act 1981 (ACT)

This case involved an appeal against the constitutional validity of the Optometrists (Amendment) Ordinance 1981 (ACT). The appellants argued that the Ordinance was invalid because it had not been passed by the Australian Capital Territory Advisory Council as required by section 90 of the Constitution Act 1934 (ACT). The respondents contended that the Ordinance was valid as it was made under the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910 (Cth) and was not subject to the requirement of section 90. The case was heard in the High Court of Australia. The central legal issue was whether the Optometrists (Amendment) Ordinance 1981 (ACT) was validly enacted under the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910 (Cth) or whether it required the approval of the Australian Capital Territory Advisory Council under section 90 of the Constitution Act 1934 (ACT). The Court examined the relevant legislative frameworks and the historical context of the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910 (Cth) to determine the scope of its power to legislate for the Australian Capital Territory. The Court concluded that the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910 (Cth) conferred upon the Governor-General the authority to make ordinances for the peace, order, and good government of the Australian Capital Territory, and that this power included the capacity to amend existing legislation. As such, the Optometrists (Amendment) Ordinance 1981 (ACT) was validly enacted under the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910 (Cth), and did not require the approval of the Australian Capital Territory Advisory Council under section 90 of the Constitution Act 1934 (ACT). The appeal was dismissed.