← All Authorities
Australia Leading Case grounds illegalityamenability and standing

Corporation of the City of Enfield v Development Assessment Commission

(2000) 199 CLR 135
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Year2000
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Australian courts must grant relief for jurisdictional error; the distinction between jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional error of law is constitutionally significant under Ch III.

Key Principle

jurisdictional error; distinction between jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional error of law

Area of Law

constitutional

Related Cases

NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (2023) 97 ALJR 1005

Indefinite administrative detention of a non-citizen with no real prospect of removal is unlawful as punitive and contrary to Ch III of the Australian Constitution, overruling Al-Kateb v Godwin.

Farm Transparency International v NSW (2022) 276 CLR 81

HCA upheld NSW ag-gag laws as valid notwithstanding a burden on the implied freedom of political communication, applying the structured proportionality test.

Palmer v Western Australia (2021) 272 CLR 505

HCA upheld WA COVID-19 border closure legislation as valid under s.92, finding restrictions on interstate movement were reasonably necessary and proportionate to protect public health.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Corporation of the City of Enfield v Development Assessment Commission and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Corporation of the City of Enf...