Street v Queensland Bar Association & Ors; Street v Queensland Bar Association & Ors; In the Matter of Robertson

These proceedings before the High Court of Australia involved Alexander Whistler Street and Timothy Frank Robertson as applicants, and the Queensland Bar Association, the Queensland Barristers Board, and the Attorney-General for the State of Queensland as respondents. The core of the dispute concerned the validity of certain rules governing the admission of barristers to practice in Queensland, specifically alleging that these rules created discriminatory distinctions.

The legal issues before the Court revolved around whether the Queensland rules for the admission of barristers discriminated between individuals who had completed their qualifications within Queensland and those admitted from other states under reciprocal arrangements. Specifically, the applicants contended that rules 15(d)(1) and (2) allowed for unrestricted admission for those qualifying within Queensland, while rules 15(d)(4) and (5) imposed different conditions for those admitted via reciprocity from other states.

The applicants' submission, as presented by Mr. Griffith, was that the rules created a discriminatory regime. Their understanding, which they presented as the basis for their argument, was that individuals admitted under rule 15(d)(1) were typically Queensland residents intending to practice principally within the state. Similarly, for admissions under rule 15(d)(i) (referring to university degrees obtained outside Queensland with a further requirement to pass stage 6), the applicants understood that such individuals were also residents of Queensland and intended to practice there. The applicants sought to challenge these distinctions, asserting they were discriminatory.