Queensland v The Commonwealth [1989] HCA 36
The inclusion of the property in the World Heritage List by the Committee is conclusive of its status for the purposes of the Act and determines that there is an international duty of protection and conservation, so that the requirements for a valid proclamation under the World Heritage Properties Conservation Act 1983 (Cth) are met and the law is supported by the external affairs power in s. 51(xxix) of the Constitution.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Procedural Posture
- Stated Case/declaratory Action / High Court Judgment
- Outcome
- Plaintiffs to pay costs; questions in stated case answered as follows: (1) Yes, inclusion in the World Heritage List is conclusive of the proclamation's validity. (2) Unnecessary to answer.
- Legal Topics
- ['external Affairs Power' 'world Heritage Properties Conservation Act' 'implementation of International Treaties' 'validity of Proclamation' 'obligations Under the World Heritage Convention']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Stated Case/declaratory Action / High Court Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the inclusion of property in the World Heritage List is conclusive of the validity of the proclamation under the World Heritage Properties Conservation Act 1983 (Cth)' "Whether the Act's provisions are supported by the external affairs power in s. 51(xxix) of the Constitution" "What constitutes an 'international duty' to protect and conserve listed property"]
Ratio Decidendi
The inclusion of the property in the World Heritage List by the Committee is conclusive of its status for the purposes of the Act and determines that there is an international duty of protection and conservation, so that the requirements for a valid proclamation under the World Heritage Properties Conservation Act 1983 (Cth) are met and the law is supported by the external affairs power in s. 51(xxix) of the Constitution.
Court Disposition
Plaintiffs to pay costs; questions in stated case answered as follows: (1) Yes, inclusion in the World Heritage List is conclusive of the proclamation's validity. (2) Unnecessary to answer.
Orders
- ['Question (1): Is the inclusion of the property in the World Heritage List conclusive of the validity of the Proclamation? Answer: Yes.' 'Question (2): If not, what is the relevant inquiry to determine the validity of the Proclamation? Answer: Unnecessary to answer.' 'Plaintiffs to pay the costs of the stated case.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment