THE KING V. LONG (EX PARTE LONG)

The matter should be adjourned sine die with liberty to either party to apply for listing, pending determination of the related custody proceedings in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which also has jurisdiction.

Parties: Respondent: The King; Prosecutor: Victor James Long; Mother/respondent: Mother of the child
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 26 November 1947
Procedural Posture: Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus / Referral of Jurisdiction Question to Full Court; Adjournment Sine Die Pending Related NSW Supreme Court Proceedings
Outcome: adjourned sine die with liberty for either party to apply for relisting; costs reserved
Legal Topics: Jurisdiction, Habeas Corpus, Custody of Children

Constitutional Law Family Law Jurisdiction Habeas Corpus Custody of Children

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 3 Party arguments 1

Parties

The King

Respondent

Victor James Long

Prosecutor

Mother of the child

Mother/respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus / Referral of Jurisdiction Question to Full Court; Adjournment Sine Die Pending Related NSW Supreme Court Proceedings

Legal Issues

1 Whether the High Court of Australia has jurisdiction to hear and determine an application for habeas corpus regarding custody of a child under section 75(4) of the Constitution when the parents are in different States.
2 Whether the High Court should exercise its jurisdiction when the Supreme Court of New South Wales is also seised of the matter under the Guardianship and Custody of Infants Act.

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

adjourned sine die with liberty for either party to apply for relisting; costs reserved

Orders

The matter is adjourned sine die with liberty to either party to apply for the matter to be placed in the list for hearing.
Costs are reserved.