澳大利亚联邦法院不可能进行非刑事处罚

Emily Hammond
{"title":"澳大利亚联邦法院不可能进行非刑事处罚","authors":"Emily Hammond","doi":"10.38127/uqlj.v43i1.7979","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Garlett v Western Australia [2022] 96 ALJR 888 (‘Garlett’) was a missed opportunity for the High Court of Australia to confirm a simple proposition: the scheme for the exercise of separated judicial power laid down in Ch III of the Constitution precludes any non-criminal punishment by courts. In Garlett, all but one Justice rejected or doubted that Ch III has this effect. This article identifies and resolves two points of contention that have impeded recognition that Ch III categorically precludes non-criminal punishment by courts. In doing so, it demonstrates that Ch III’s exclusive vesting of separated judicial power in courts supports a more ‘joined up’ way of thinking about permissible court functions across the Australian federation than was seen in Garlett.","PeriodicalId":83293,"journal":{"name":"The University of Queensland law journal","volume":"608 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impossibility of Non-Criminal Punishment by Courts in the Australian Federation\",\"authors\":\"Emily Hammond\",\"doi\":\"10.38127/uqlj.v43i1.7979\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Garlett v Western Australia [2022] 96 ALJR 888 (‘Garlett’) was a missed opportunity for the High Court of Australia to confirm a simple proposition: the scheme for the exercise of separated judicial power laid down in Ch III of the Constitution precludes any non-criminal punishment by courts. In Garlett, all but one Justice rejected or doubted that Ch III has this effect. This article identifies and resolves two points of contention that have impeded recognition that Ch III categorically precludes non-criminal punishment by courts. In doing so, it demonstrates that Ch III’s exclusive vesting of separated judicial power in courts supports a more ‘joined up’ way of thinking about permissible court functions across the Australian federation than was seen in Garlett.\",\"PeriodicalId\":83293,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The University of Queensland law journal\",\"volume\":\"608 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The University of Queensland law journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v43i1.7979\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The University of Queensland law journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v43i1.7979","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Garlett 诉西澳大利亚州[2022] 96 ALJR 888("Garlett")案是澳大利亚高等法院错失的一次机会,它确认了一个简单的命题:《宪法》第三章规定的行使独立司法权的方案排除了法院的任何非刑事处罚。在 Garlett 案中,除一名法官外,所有法官都拒绝或怀疑宪法第三章具有这种效力。本文指出并解决了阻碍承认宪法第三章明确排除法院非刑事处罚的两个争议点。在此过程中,本文证明了《宪法》第三章将独立的司法权独家赋予法院的观点,支持以一种比 Garlett 案更 "联合 "的方式思考澳大利亚联邦允许的法院职能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Impossibility of Non-Criminal Punishment by Courts in the Australian Federation
Garlett v Western Australia [2022] 96 ALJR 888 (‘Garlett’) was a missed opportunity for the High Court of Australia to confirm a simple proposition: the scheme for the exercise of separated judicial power laid down in Ch III of the Constitution precludes any non-criminal punishment by courts. In Garlett, all but one Justice rejected or doubted that Ch III has this effect. This article identifies and resolves two points of contention that have impeded recognition that Ch III categorically precludes non-criminal punishment by courts. In doing so, it demonstrates that Ch III’s exclusive vesting of separated judicial power in courts supports a more ‘joined up’ way of thinking about permissible court functions across the Australian federation than was seen in Garlett.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Robodebt and Novel Data Technologies in the Public Sector The Territorial Scope of Australia’s Unfair Contract Terms Provisions Regulating Decisions that Lead to Loss of Life in Workplaces Lending on the Edge Substantive Equality and the Possibilities of the Queensland Human Rights Act 2019
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1