Jurisdictional error guide

Since the decision of the High Court on 4 February in Plaintiff S157, jurisdictional error has re-emerged as a ground for judicial review of RRT decisions. The High Court in Plaintiff S157 v MIMIA [2003] HCA 2 (4 Feb 2003) held that a decision affected by jurisdictional error is not a decision under the Act and is therefore not protected from review by the privative clause, s. 474.

This note gives a brief summary of the concept of jurisdictional error. Please note, this summary is intended to be a guide to the cases only, and does not purport to be a substitute for reading the cases, particularly for the purposes of written submissions or the giving of legal advice.

A guide to Craig v South Australia - Notes on jurisdictional error

Yusuf

Commentary on Dranichnikov v MIMA