Government of the Russian Federation v Commonwealth of AustraliaCitation:[2023] HCA 20Before:Jagot JDate:26 Jun 2023Case Number:C9/2023Read more

Government of the Russian Federation v Commonwealth of AustraliaCitation:[2023] HCA 20Before:Jagot JDate:26 Jun 2023Case Number:C9/2023Read more

The plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case or serious question to be tried regarding the constitutional invalidity of the Act or an acquisition of property otherwise than on just terms. The balance of convenience did not favour the grant of an interlocutory injunction.

Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: Commonwealth
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Law / Injunction / Interlocutory Application for Injunction
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction refused
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Acquisition of Property, Constitutional Validity, Compensation
Constitutional Law Property Law Statutory Interpretation Interlocutory Injunctions Acquisition of Property Constitutional Validity Compensation

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

Commonwealth

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Law / Injunction / Interlocutory Application for Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Home Affairs Act 2023 (Cth) is constitutionally invalid for lack of legislative power or for contravening s 51(xxxi) of the Constitution
  2. 2 Whether the Act results in an acquisition of property otherwise than on just terms
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case or serious question to be tried

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case or serious question to be tried regarding the constitutional invalidity of the Act or an acquisition of property otherwise than on just terms. The balance of convenience did not favour the grant of an interlocutory injunction.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction refused

Orders

  • Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed