Wakim Ex parte McNally

The High Court of Australia considered an application for a writ of prohibition in *Wakim Ex parte McNally*. The applicant, Mr. Wakim, sought to challenge the validity of certain provisions of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) that purported to confer jurisdiction on the Federal Court of Australia to hear and determine appeals from decisions of the Refugee Review Tribunal. The respondent was the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Parliament of the Commonwealth had the constitutional power to invest a federal court with jurisdiction to determine appeals from decisions made by a non-judicial body, such as the Refugee Review Tribunal, which was established under federal legislation. Specifically, the Court had to determine if such a conferral of jurisdiction was consistent with Chapter III of the *Australian Constitution*, which delineates the powers and structure of the federal judicature.

The High Court held that the provisions of the *Migration Act* were invalid. The Court reasoned that Chapter III of the Constitution confines the judicial power of the Commonwealth to courts that are invested with federal jurisdiction. It further held that the Refugee Review Tribunal was not a court exercising federal jurisdiction, and therefore, the Parliament could not vest in a federal court the power to hear appeals from its decisions. This conclusion was based on the principle that federal courts can only exercise judicial power, and the power to review the decisions of a non-judicial tribunal in the manner contemplated by the *Migration Act* was not a power that could be characterised as judicial power within the meaning of Chapter III.

Consequently, the High Court made orders absolute for the writ of prohibition, preventing the Federal Court from exercising jurisdiction in the appeals.