Skase v Donnelly; Re Donnelly; Ex parte Skase

This matter concerned an application by Christopher Charles Skase for an interlocutory injunction and a writ of prohibition against Max Donnelly, the trustee in bankruptcy of Mr Skase's estate. The Attorney-General of the Commonwealth intervened in the proceedings. Mr Donnelly, the trustee, did not intend to appear at the hearing due to a lack of funding for the administration but was opposed to the orders sought by Mr Skase.

The High Court was required to consider the validity of a subsection of the Bankruptcy Act, which Mr Skase alleged was unconstitutional. The Court also had to determine whether a writ of prohibition was appropriate in the circumstances, particularly given that Mr Donnelly was not an officer of the Commonwealth. The Attorney-General sought to uphold the principle that injunctions should not issue save in the most exceptional cases, especially when constitutional validity is in question.

The Attorney-General indicated that the issue of constitutional validity could be stated to the Full Court for determination if appropriately pleaded. Regarding the writ of prohibition, the Attorney-General argued it was otiose and that Mr Donnelly was not a Commonwealth officer. The Court was also invited to consider whether, in its discretion, it was appropriate to proceed with determining the ultimate truth of the constitutional point given other proceedings were on foot.