© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2001] QCA 518
Court of Appeal (Qld)
2001-11-23
McMurdo P, McPherson and Davies JJASeparate reasons for judgment of, each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
Original judgment source is linked above.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT - STATES - whether the Constitution Act Amendment Act 1977 (Qld) is invalid - whether that Act expressly or impliedly provided for the abolition of or alteration in the office of Governor as described in s 53 Constitution Act 1867 (Qld) - whether a referendum was required to validly enact the amending Act
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - IMPERIAL, COLONIAL, STATE AND COMONWEALTH CONSTITUTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS - GENERALLY - MATTERS RELATING TO CREATION OF COLONIES - GENERAL PRINCIPLES
STATUTES - ACTS OF PARLIAMENT - VALIDITY OF LEGISLATION
Australian Constitution Act 1842; 5 & 6 Vict c 76 (Imp), s 40
Australian States Constitution Act 1907 (Imp), s 1
Statute of Westminster 1931; 22 Geo 5, c 4 (UK), s 9(2)
Australia (Request and Consent) Act 1986 (Cth), s 3
Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia (Cth), s 51(xxxviii), s 92
Constitution Act 1867 (Qld), s 11A, s 11B, s 53
Constitution Act Amendment Act 1934 (Qld)
Constitution Act Amendment Act 1977 (Qld)
Constitution (Office of Governor) Act 1987 (Qld), s 3(1), s 3(2), s 8(c)(i), s 14, s 15
Attorney-General for New South Wales v Trethowan (1931) 44 CLR 394, considered
Attorney-General for New South Wales v Trethowan [1932] UKPC 1; [1932] AC 526, considered
Cameron v Kyte (1835) 3 Knapp 332; 12 ER 678, considered
Durham Holdings Pty Ltd v New South Wales (2001) 75 ALJR 501, applied
Hazelwood v Webber [1934] HCA 62; (1934) 52 CLR 268, distinguished
Hennessy v Wright (1888) 21 QBD 509, considered
Musgrave v Pulido (1879) 5 App Cas 102, considered
Port MacDonnell Professional Fishermen's Association Inc v South Australia [1989] HCA 49; (1989) 168 CLR 340, considered
Rediffusion (Hong Kong) Ltd v Attorney-General of Hong Kong [1970] UKPC 12; [1970] AC 1136, considered
Sue v Hill [1999] HCA 30; (1999) 199 CLR 462, considered
W R Moran Proprietary Limited v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (NSW) [1940] AC 838, considered
Union Steamship Co of Australia Pty Ltd v King [1988] HCA 55; (1988) 166 CLR 1, applied
Yougarla v Western Australia [2001] HCA 47; (2001) 75 ALJR 1316, considered
Sharples
Arnison & Ors [2001] QCA 518
(1931) 44 CLR 394
(2000) 74 ALJR 1289
(2001) 75 ALJR 501
(1934) 52 CLR 268
(1989) 168 CLR 340
(1912) 16 CLR 99
(1999) 199 CLR 462
(1988) 166 CLR 1
(2001) 75 ALJR 1316