Re Australian Teachers Union; Ex parte Her Majesty's Attorney-General for the State of New South Wales
Case
•
[1992] HCATrans 233
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Re Australian Teachers Union; Ex parte Her Majesty's Attorney-General for the State of New South Wales [1992] HCATrans 233
[1992] HCATrans 233
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The applicants, the Attorney-General for the State of New South Wales and the Technical and Further Education Commission of New South Wales, sought writs of prohibition, mandamus, and certiorari against Deputy Presidents Keith Hancock and John William Macbean of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission, and the Australian Teachers Union. The dispute concerned an application for these prerogative writs.
The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether to grant an order nisi for the writs sought by the applicants. This involved determining if there was a sufficient prima facie case to warrant further consideration by the Court, including whether to grant a stay of proceedings limited to the New South Wales interests.
The Court, in considering the application, was presented with affidavits and a draft order. The Solicitor-General for New South Wales indicated that the stay sought was limited to the "Prosecutors and Applicants" and confined to "New South Wales interests." The Court indicated it would make an order nisi as sought, including the stay, and made it returnable for the sittings commencing on 22 September. The Court also noted that costs were barred by the Act, particularly in favour of law officers.
The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether to grant an order nisi for the writs sought by the applicants. This involved determining if there was a sufficient prima facie case to warrant further consideration by the Court, including whether to grant a stay of proceedings limited to the New South Wales interests.
The Court, in considering the application, was presented with affidavits and a draft order. The Solicitor-General for New South Wales indicated that the stay sought was limited to the "Prosecutors and Applicants" and confined to "New South Wales interests." The Court indicated it would make an order nisi as sought, including the stay, and made it returnable for the sittings commencing on 22 September. The Court also noted that costs were barred by the Act, particularly in favour of law officers.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Constitutional Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Stay of Proceedings
-
Standing
-
Costs
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0