Van Lieshout v City of Fremantle [No 2]

The appellant, Van Lieshout, was convicted for breaching planning laws by placing political signs on her property without the required approval. The City of Fremantle prosecuted, claiming that the signs violated local planning regulations. The dispute was heard and determined in the Magistrates Court, and Van Lieshout appealed to a higher court.

The appeal centred on whether the planning laws restricting the placement of signs were invalid due to their inconsistency with the implied right to freedom of political communication under the Commonwealth Constitution. This issue necessitated a review of several High Court precedents. The Commonwealth and State Attorneys General were notified of this constitutional question under section 78B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth). The Attorney General for Western Australia intervened in the proceedings, providing additional submissions. The appeal's final determination was deferred until the High Court issued its decisions in two related cases, Attorney General for the State of South Australia v The Corporation of the City of Adelaide and Monis v The Queen. Both parties and the intervenor were given an opportunity to comment on how these High Court cases applied to the present appeal.

The court found that the appeal grounds, except those concerning the right to freedom of political communication, did not warrant leave to appeal and were dismissed. However, regarding the freedom of political communication argument, while leave to appeal was granted, the grounds were ultimately unsuccessful upon examination. The court held that the planning laws did not infringe upon the appellant's constitutional rights, thereby upholding her conviction. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction stood.