Street v Queensland Bar Association & Ors; In the matter of an application by Robertson

This matter came before the High Court of Australia concerning an application by Alexander Whistler Street, who sought admission as a barrister of the Supreme Court of Queensland. The Queensland Bar Association and other defendants opposed his admission. Street had been practising as a barrister in New South Wales and other Australian jurisdictions, but was refused admission in Queensland. Subsequent to his refusal, the rules for admission in Queensland were amended to impose requirements relating to practice principally in Queensland.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the amendments to the Queensland Bar Association's admission rules, which required applicants to practice principally in Queensland, were invalid. Specifically, the Court was asked to determine if these amendments contravened section 92 of the Australian Constitution, which guarantees freedom of trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States, and section 117 of the Constitution, which prohibits discrimination against residents of other States.

The Court was presented with a case stated, and the plaintiff argued that the amended rules were in breach of sections 92 and 117 of the Constitution. The defendants denied these allegations. The plaintiff conceded that, technically, the statement of claim was in difficulty regarding the inclusion of legal arguments, but the purpose of the application was to resolve this procedural issue and address the substantive constitutional questions. The Court was to consider how to proceed to determine these constitutional challenges.