Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Kirby and a Decision Granting Unlimited Power
. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 6 page paper considers the judgment made by Kirby J in the case of Building Construction Employees and Builders Labourers Federation of New South Wales V Minister for Industrial Relations (1986) 7 NSWLR 372, which appears to give the Australian legislature unlimited power. The writer argues that this decision was wrong. The bibliography cites 5 sources.
Page Count:
6 pages (~225 words per page)
File: TS14_TEauspow.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
subsequent developments in terms of the way the law is seen as used and how the courts have interpreted it. One of the more controversial cases that considered the power
of the legislature can be seen as that of Building Construction Employees and Builders Labourers Federation of New South Wales V Minister for Industrial Relations (1986) 7 NSWLR 372. This
was presided over by Kirby J, who at the time was Kirby P. Here we can argument that the decision he handed down was wrong in the way that it
looked at the law an interpreted the way that he felt the legislature was given unlimited power. We may look at this case, arguing that the offence of making
a wrong judgement was more severe and also more worrying due to the position of Kirby at the time. Kirby was the president of the NSW Court of Appeal. The
way in which he saw legislature as opposed to natural law He took the ideas that had been laid down by Lord Reid in British Railways Board v Pickin (1974)
AC 765 at 782 and extended them stating that "The appeal to natural law and to a principle higher than parliamentary sovereignty is certainly out of line with the mainstream
of constitutional theory as applied in our courts" (Lexis, 2002). The arguments put forward are that the power of the legislature is unlimited, the power of natural law and even
the law of gad are seen as subservient or less persuasive, and certainly being less valid in the Australian courts, stating that "In earlier times many learned lawyers seem to
have believed that an act of parliament could be disregarded insofar as it was contrary to the law of god or the law of nature of natural justice, but since
...