Rev. Fr. Ogle, W. v. Strickland, J. & Ors [1987] FCA 50

Rev. Fr. Ogle, W. v. Strickland, J. & Ors [1987] FCA 50

Ministers of religion whose professional duties include teaching, fostering Christian beliefs, and repelling blasphemy possess a 'special interest' beyond that of ordinary members of the public, conferring standing as 'persons aggrieved' under s5(1) of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 to challenge decisions approving and registering alleged blasphemous film by the Censorship Board.

Parties
Appellant: REV. FR. WALTER OGLE; Appellant: REV. FR. JOHN O'NEILL; First Respondent: JANET STRICKLAND, at all material times Chief Censor of the Censorship Board constituted pursuant to the Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations 1956; Second Respondents: KENNETH BARTON, DAVID HAINES, GRAHAM WOOD, DEBORAH EHRLICH, WILLIAM SALTER, BRONWYN BOEKENSTEIN, WILLIAM HUME, ADRIAN CARNELUTTI, UNA JOANNA DOWNER, ANDREE MARGARET WRIGHT, EVE MILDREN constituting with the First Respondent the Censorship Board constituted pursuant to the Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations 1956; Third Respondent: PAN AMERICAN PRODUCTIONS PTY. LIMITED
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 February 1987
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Administrative Law / Appeal From a Single Judge of the Federal Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Standing recognised for appellants.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Standing (locus Standi), Censorship, Blasphemy
Administrative Law Judicial Review Standing (locus Standi) Censorship Blasphemy

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 7 Authorities cited 46 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

REV. FR. WALTER OGLE

Appellant

REV. FR. JOHN O'NEILL

Appellant

JANET STRICKLAND, at all material times Chief Censor of the Censorship Board constituted pursuant to the Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations 1956

First Respondent

KENNETH BARTON, DAVID HAINES, GRAHAM WOOD, DEBORAH EHRLICH, WILLIAM SALTER, BRONWYN BOEKENSTEIN, WILLIAM HUME, ADRIAN CARNELUTTI, UNA JOANNA DOWNER, ANDREE MARGARET WRIGHT, EVE MILDREN constituting with the First Respondent the Censorship Board constituted pursuant to the Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations 1956

Second Respondents

PAN AMERICAN PRODUCTIONS PTY. LIMITED

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Administrative Law / Appeal From a Single Judge of the Federal Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Do ministers of religion have standing ('locus standi') to challenge decisions of the Censorship Board relating to alleged blasphemous film under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977?
  2. 2 Does 'person aggrieved' in s5(1) of the Act include persons with spiritual concern beyond intellectual or emotional interests?

Ratio Decidendi

Ministers of religion whose professional duties include teaching, fostering Christian beliefs, and repelling blasphemy possess a 'special interest' beyond that of ordinary members of the public, conferring standing as 'persons aggrieved' under s5(1) of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 to challenge decisions approving and registering alleged blasphemous film by the Censorship Board.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Standing recognised for appellants.

Orders

  • Order of the primary judge dismissing the application is rescinded.
  • Motion of first and second respondents seeking dismissal is dismissed.