Statistics (Repeal) Act 1985 (ACT)

The case concerned the validity of the Statistics (Repeal) Ordinance 1985 (ACT) under the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910. The Statistics Ordinance 1929 was repealed by the Ordinance, which was challenged by the Australian Capital Territory (ACT). The dispute reached the High Court of Australia, where the primary issue was whether the Ordinance was validly enacted under the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910. The ACT argued that the Ordinance was not authorised by the Act, while the Commonwealth asserted that it had the necessary legislative power.

The Court considered the scope of legislative power granted to the Commonwealth under the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910. It examined whether the repeal of the Statistics Ordinance 1929 was within the ambit of the Act's provisions, which allow for the enactment of Ordinances by the Governor-General in Council for the peace, order, and good government of the Seat of Government. The Court also looked at the historical context and the intent of the legislation, focusing on whether the repeal was an exercise of administrative convenience or a substantive change in law. Ultimately, the Court found that the repeal was authorised by the Act, as it was within the scope of the legislative power granted to the Commonwealth for the administration of the Seat of Government.

In its decision, the Court held that the Statistics (Repeal) Ordinance 1985 was validly enacted under the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910. The Court found that the repeal of the Statistics Ordinance 1929 was within the legislative power granted to the Commonwealth to enact Ordinances for the administration of the Seat of Government. The Court's reasoning emphasised the broad scope of the Act's provisions and the historical context of the legislation, which indicated that the repeal was an exercise of administrative convenience rather than a substantive change in law. As a result, the challenge by the ACT was dismissed, and the repeal was upheld as valid.