Re Attorney-General (Cth); Ex parte Skyring

The High Court, constituted by Kirby J, considered an application by Mr. Skyring for leave to commence proceedings following an order made under High Court Rule 63.6, which deals with vexatious litigants. Mr. Skyring sought to challenge the constitutional validity of Commonwealth legislation concerning legal tender, specifically arguing that paper money was not legal tender in Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether Mr. Skyring should be granted leave to commence proceedings. This required the Court to assess the merits of his proposed constitutional challenge, which centred on the interpretation of sections 51(xii) and 51(xiii) of the Australian Constitution, relating to the Commonwealth Parliament's power to legislate with respect to coinage and currency, and legal tender.

Kirby J found the argument that paper money was not legal tender in Australia to be untenable. His Honour reasoned that the concept of legal tender in Australia had evolved and that Commonwealth legislation had established paper currency as legal tender. Consequently, the proposed constitutional challenge lacked sufficient merit to warrant granting leave to commence proceedings, particularly in light of the existing order designating Mr. Skyring as a vexatious litigant. The application for leave to commence proceedings was refused.