Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/2440/82192
Type: | Journal article |
Title: | Parliament's role in constitutional interpretation |
Author: | Appleby, G. Webster, A. |
Citation: | Melbourne University Law Review, 2013; 37(2):255-296 |
Publisher: | Melbourne University Law Review |
Issue Date: | 2013 |
ISSN: | 0025-8938 1839-3810 |
Statement of Responsibility: | Gabrielle Appleby and Adam Webster |
Abstract: | In Australia, the role of interpreting the Constitution is ultimately for the High Court, but some 'space' remains for its interpretation by the Parliament. Space exists in rare cases where the Court defers to the judgment of Parliament or where a non-justiciable question arises. In these cases, Parliament must consider constitutionality without assistance from the courts: 'parliament-centred interpretation'. In the predominance of cases, while the final word on constitutional interpretation remains with the courts, we argue that 'best practice' requires individual parliamentarians to consider the constitutionality of Bills using 'court-centred interpretation'. We demonstrate our argument using two case studies: the proposed amendments to the Marriage Act 1961 (Cth) to allow for same-sex marriage, and the passage of legislation following Williams v Commonwealth. |
Keywords: | parliament constitutional interpretation |
Rights: | Copyright status unknown |
Published version: | http://www.law.unimelb.edu.au/files/dmfile/01ApplebyandWebster-Final2.pdf |
Appears in Collections: | Aurora harvest Law publications |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
RA_hdl_82192.pdf Restricted Access | Restricted Access | 344.3 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.