The Anisminic doctrine of extended jurisdictional error in New South Wales superior courts

Publisher:
Thomson Lawbook Co
Publication Type:
Journal Article
Citation:
Local Government Law Journal, 2007, 12 (3), pp. 164 - 182
Issue Date:
2007-01
Full metadata record
Files in This Item:
Filename Description Size
Thumbnail2006010532.pdf1.24 MB
Adobe PDF
In Australia, despite some intermittent enthusiasm for the Anisminic doctrine of extended jurisdictional error, most Australian superior courts continue to maintain, or at least pay lip-service to, a distinction between jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional errors of law. This has been particularly the case in New South Wales where, even since the landmark High Court of Australia case of Craig v South Australia, the State's two superior courts, the Supreme Court (together with the Court of Appeal) and the Land and Environment Court, respectively, generally decide matters before them involving jurisdictional error using the traditional doctrine of jurisdictional error, notwithstanding that Craig is increasingly, and at times incogruously, cited as authority for their conclusions.
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: