Clarkson v Commonwealth of Australia [2006] FCA 1348

Clarkson v Commonwealth of Australia [2006] FCA 1348

The application against the first, fourth, fifth and sixth respondents was incompetent and had no reasonable prospect of success because the alleged decisions were not reviewable decisions made under an enactment for the purposes of the AD(JR) Act. Decisions concerning amendment of the Arrangement were decisions of the Governor-General and excluded from review. The State respondents acted under New South Wales legislation or contractual arrangements, not under a Commonwealth enactment, and the Arrangement did not convert State powers or State institutions into Commonwealth powers or institutions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 (cth) Concerning Alleged Decisions Relating to the Applicant's Incarceration in New South Wales Prisons as a Federal Offender. / Motions by the First, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Respondents for Summary Dismissal Under S 31 a of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth).
Outcome
The application against the first, fourth, fifth and sixth respondents was dismissed with costs. The proceedings involving the second and third respondents were adjourned.
Legal Topics
['ad(jr) Act Reviewability' 'decisions Made Under an Enactment' 'federal Offenders Detained in State Prisons' 'section 120 of the Constitution' 'summary Dismissal' 'state Officers and Commonwealth Arrangements']
['administrative Law' 'practice and Procedure' 'judicial Review' 'prison Law'] ['ad(jr) Act Reviewability' 'decisions Made Under an Enactment' 'federal Offenders Detained in State Prisons' 'section 120 of the Constitution' 'summary Dismissal' 'state Officers and Commonwealth Arrangements']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 (cth) Concerning Alleged Decisions Relating to the Applicant's Incarceration in New South Wales Prisons as a Federal Offender. / Motions by the First, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Respondents for Summary Dismissal Under S 31 a of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth).

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the alleged decisions or failures to act by the Commonwealth were decisions of an administrative character made under an enactment for the purposes of the AD(JR) Act.' 'Whether decisions made by State officers or bodies in relation to a federal offender detained in New South Wales prisons were made under the Commonwealth Arrangement or under State law.' 'Whether the application against the first, fourth, fifth and sixth respondents had any reasonable prospect of success under s 31A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).' "Whether the Court had jurisdiction under the AD(JR) Act to review the NSW Ombudsman's decision not to investigate the applicant's complaint."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application against the first, fourth, fifth and sixth respondents was incompetent and had no reasonable prospect of success because the alleged decisions were not reviewable decisions made under an enactment for the purposes of the AD(JR) Act. Decisions concerning amendment of the Arrangement were decisions of the Governor-General and excluded from review. The State respondents acted under New South Wales legislation or contractual arrangements, not under a Commonwealth enactment, and the Arrangement did not convert State powers or State institutions into Commonwealth powers or institutions.

Court Disposition

The application against the first, fourth, fifth and sixth respondents was dismissed with costs. The proceedings involving the second and third respondents were adjourned.

Orders

  • ['The application against the first, fourth, fifth and sixth respondents be dismissed.' 'The applicant pay the costs of each of these respondents.']