Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28

Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28

Section 160(d) of the Broadcasting Services Act required the ABA to perform its functions, including setting program standards, in a manner consistent with international obligations such as those in the Protocol to the Australia New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement. The Australian Content Standard, specifically cl 9, gave preference to Australian programs and thus was inconsistent with those international obligations. However, a breach of s 160(d) did not render the standard invalid; rather, it was unlawful but remained legally operative until set aside. The applicant was entitled to a declaration that cl 9 was unlawfully made, not that it was void.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court of Australia, Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
['statutory Interpretation' 'international Treaty Obligations' 'regulation of Broadcasting Standards' 'invalidity of Delegated Legislation']
['administrative Law' 'broadcasting Law' 'international Law'] ['statutory Interpretation' 'international Treaty Obligations' 'regulation of Broadcasting Standards' 'invalidity of Delegated Legislation']

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

Appeal / High Court of Australia, Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Australian Content Standard made by the Australian Broadcasting Authority is invalid due to inconsistency with Australia's international obligations under the Australia New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement and the Trade in Services Protocol." "Whether section 160(d) of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 requires the ABA's program standards to comply with international obligations." 'Whether breach of section 160(d) results in invalidity of the standard made.']

Ratio Decidendi

Section 160(d) of the Broadcasting Services Act required the ABA to perform its functions, including setting program standards, in a manner consistent with international obligations such as those in the Protocol to the Australia New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement. The Australian Content Standard, specifically cl 9, gave preference to Australian programs and thus was inconsistent with those international obligations. However, a breach of s 160(d) did not render the standard invalid; rather, it was unlawful but remained legally operative until set aside. The applicant was entitled to a declaration that cl 9 was unlawfully made, not that it was void.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed.' "Respondent to pay the appellants' costs of this appeal." "Orders of the Full Court of the Federal Court of 12 December 1996 set aside and substituted as follows: (1) Appeal allowed and orders made by Davies J set aside. (2) Declaration that cl 9 of the Australian Content Standard determined by...