Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Perrett v Attorney-General of the Commonwealth of Australia [2015] FCA 834 Citation: Perrett v Attorney-General of the Commonwealth of Australia [2015] FCA 834
Parties: GRAHAM DOUGLAS PERRETT, CLAIRE MARY MOORE, GREG DAVIES, KAREN BATES AND TING WEI v GEORGE HENRY BRANDIS, ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
File number: QUD 613 of 2015
Judge: DOWSETT J
Date of judgment: 13 August 2015
Catchwords: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – subordinate legislation – validity – disallowance of regulations by Senate – whether a new regulation, Family Law (Fees) Amendment (2015 Measures No 1) Regulation 2015 (Cth), is "the same in substance" as a regulation previously disallowed within the meaning of s 48 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 (Cth) and hence of no effect. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – standing to seek injunctive and declarative relief under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – where applicants are parliamentarians or senators – whether applicants have "special interest".
Legislation: Acts Interpretation Act 1901-1941 (Cth) ss 48, 49 Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 125 Family Law (Fees) Amendment (2015 Measures No 1) Regulation 2015 (Cth) Family Law (Fees) Regulation 2012 (Cth) Federal Courts Legislation Amendment (Fees) Regulation 2015 (Cth) Legislative Instruments Act 2003 (Cth) ss 24, 38, 39, 41, 42, 45, 46, 47, 48 National Security Act 1939-1940 (Cth) Women's Employment Act 1942 (Cth)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate