Wight v Honourable Chris Pearce, MP, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer [2007] FCA 26

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Wight v Honourable Chris Pearce, MP, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer [2007] FCA 26

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – external affairs power – whether the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (Cth) is supported by s 51(xxix) insofar as it applies to persons not ordinarily resident in Australia – where law deals with acquisition of real property inside geographic limits of Australia – whether external affairs power supports laws with some operation inside Australia – whether application to persons not ordinarily resident in Australia is a sufficient external element to constitute a valid law with respect to external affairs.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – aliens power – whether Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (Cth) supported by s 51(xix) insofar as it applies to non-citizens – where Act applies to both citizens and non-citizens not ordinarily resident in Australia – effect of s 5A of Act.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – acquisition of land on just terms – whether ss 4(6) and 21A of Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (Cth) are subject to s 51(xxxi) – whether there was any acquisition within the terms of s 51(xxxi).

PROPERTY – where property held jointly – where one joint tenant becomes sole registered proprietor – whether applicant acquired an interest in the property pursuant to s 12A of Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (Cth).

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – where applicant required to provide notice of proposal to acquire land – where respondent granted approval on the basis of invalid notice – whether valid notice required for a decision to be made under s 25 of Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (Cth) – whether open to respondent to consider making a divestiture order under s 21A(4) of Act.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – procedural fairness – where respondent alleged 'serious visa violations' against applicant in correspondence – whether applicant given adequate opportunity to respond to adverse information – whether respondent under obligation to invite comment from applicant regarding adverse information and conclusions not obviously open – whether failure to invite comment invalidates decision to make divestiture order.