R v Green; Ex parte Cheung Cheuk To [1965] HCA 32

R v Green; Ex parte Cheung Cheuk To [1965] HCA 32

The applicant’s certificate of exemption was lawfully issued; he was a prohibited immigrant at the expiry of his permit and subject to deportation. The relevant provisions of the Migration Act are constitutionally valid. The detention pending deportation was lawful despite any irregularity in arrest procedure. The Supreme Court lost jurisdiction once constitutional validity was raised.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Application for Habeas Corpus / Final Judgment
Outcome
Order nisi discharged with costs.
Legal Topics
['deportation' 'habeas Corpus' 'constitutional Validity of Statutes' 'temporary Entry Permits']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Habeas Corpus / Final Judgment

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant’s detention pending deportation under the Migration Act was unlawful' 'Whether the deportation order was validly made under s. 18 of the Migration Act' 'Whether ss. 6(5), 6(6), and 7 of the Migration Act are constitutionally invalid' "Whether the applicant's detention was unlawful due to procedural non-compliance with s. 39(2) of the Migration Act" 'Whether the Supreme Court of Victoria retained jurisdiction once a constitutional question arose']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant’s certificate of exemption was lawfully issued; he was a prohibited immigrant at the expiry of his permit and subject to deportation. The relevant provisions of the Migration Act are constitutionally valid. The detention pending deportation was lawful despite any irregularity in arrest procedure. The Supreme Court lost jurisdiction once constitutional validity was raised.

Court Disposition

Order nisi discharged with costs.

Orders

  • ['Order nisi for habeas corpus discharged with costs.']