Abstract
This article considers a recent High Court decision that indicates a greater willingness to accord constitutional protection to fundamental due process rights such as the right to be heard and the right to confront accusers. There has been increased use of secretive processes whereby a person liable to be affected by a decision does not have the right to see, hear and test the evidence being led against them. The recent decision indicates the High Court may be prepared to take a tougher position against such measures. The article places these developments in the broader context of development of Chapter III jurisprudence in the past 30 years, with a particular focus on due process protection.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 93-122 |
| Number of pages | 30 |
| Journal | Australian Journal of Administrative Law |
| Volume | 31 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Publication status | Published - 11 Sept 2024 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Non-Disclosure of Relevant Material and Chapter III: The Tantalising Promise of Due Process Rights Protection by the Australian Constitution in the Gageler High Court Using Separation of Powers Principles'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver