Palmer v Western Australia

The High Court of Australia considered a constitutional challenge brought by Mr Palmer against the State of Western Australia. The dispute concerned the validity of Western Australia's border closure directions, implemented under the *Emergency Management Act 2005* (WA) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, the court was asked to determine whether these measures impermissibly infringed the freedom of interstate trade, commerce, and intercourse guaranteed by section 92 of the Australian Constitution.

The legal issues before the court were whether the *Emergency Management Act 2005* (WA), particularly sections 56 and 67, and the subsequent *Quarantine (Closing the Border) Directions (WA)*, imposed an impermissible burden on interstate trade, commerce, or intercourse, thereby infringing section 92 of the Constitution. The court was required to assess whether the authorising provisions of the Act or the exercise of the power to make the Directions raised a constitutional question regarding this freedom.

The High Court, comprising Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Keane, Gordon, and Edelman JJ, concluded that the relevant provisions of the *Emergency Management Act 2005* (WA), when applied to an emergency involving a hazard like a plague or epidemic, complied with the constitutional limitation imposed by section 92 of the Constitution. The Court found that the exercise of the power to issue the *Quarantine (Closing the Border) Directions (WA)* did not raise a constitutional question. Consequently, the Court answered the questions stated for its opinion, finding that the Act and the Directions, as properly construed, did not impermissibly infringe section 92. The plaintiffs were ordered to pay the costs of the special case.