Statements (51)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instanceOf |
legal case
|
| gptkbp:applicationNumber |
S202/2016
|
| gptkbp:caseTypes |
constitutional challenge
S202/2016 |
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:Canberra
High Court |
| gptkbp:date |
2017-06-06
|
| gptkbp:decidedBy |
gptkb:High_Court_of_Australia
|
| gptkbp:gameFeatures |
Kiefel
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Kiefel v Commonwealth
|
| gptkbp:impact |
Australian_constitutional_interpretation
|
| gptkbp:judges |
gptkb:Chief_Justice_Kiefel
gptkb:Justice_Gordon gptkb:Justice_Gageler gptkb:Justice_Nettle gptkb:Justice_Bell unanimous decision |
| gptkbp:legalStatus |
federalism
government accountability constitutional law judicial review separation of powers executive power rights of individuals parliamentary sovereignty constitutional validity upheld interpretation_of_the_Constitution scope_of_Commonwealth_powers |
| gptkbp:notableEvent |
gptkb:Australian_Constitution
Migration Act 1958 |
| gptkbp:notableFeature |
resolved
influences public policy important for legal scholars guides future cases affects immigration policy relevant for constitutional debates shapes future legal interpretations reinforces constitutional protections [2017] HCA 16 affects government actions clarifies executive powers impacts legal precedents influences judicial review standards |
| gptkbp:outcome |
decision_in_favor_of_Kiefel
|
| gptkbp:precedent |
established principles of law
in future immigration cases |
| gptkbp:relatedPatent |
Plaintiff_M70/2011_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship
|
| gptkbp:respondsTo |
gptkb:Commonwealth_of_Australia
|
| gptkbp:significance |
important for immigration law
|
| gptkbp:soundtrack |
2017-05-02
|
| gptkbp:yearEstablished |
2017-06-06
|