High Court of Australia
[Index]
[Search]
[Noteup]
[Context
] [Help]
THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
v
. TASMANIA. THE TASMANIAN DAM CASE (1983) 158 CLR 1
Constitutional Law (Cth) - International Law
COURT
High Court of Australia
Gibbs C.J.(1), Mason(2), Murphy(3), Wilson(4), Brennan(5), Deane(6) and
Dawson(7) JJ.
HRNG
Canberra, 1983, May 31; June 1-3, 7-10;
Brisbane, 1983, July 1. #DATE 1:7:1983
JUDGE1
July 1.
THE COURT published the following statement and the following written
judgements were delivered:
STATEMENT
It seems convenient to state shortly the effect of the answers given by the
Court to the questions asked in these actions. The questions concern the
validity of certain Commonwealth Acts, regulations and proclamations which
have been brought into being for the immediate purpose of preventing the
construction of the Gordon below Franklin Dam. They are strictly legal
questions. The Court is in no way concerned with the question whether it is
desirable or undesirable, either on the whole or from any particular point of
view, that the construction of the dam should proceed. The assessment of the
possible advantages and disadvantages of constructing the dam, and the
balancing of the one against the other, are not matters for the Court, and the
Court's judgment does not reflect any view of the merits of the dispute.
The effect of the decision of the Court, reached in relation to each
question by a majority, is as follows"
1. The World Heritage (Western Tasmania Wilderness) Regulations made under
s. 69 of the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1975 are wholly
invalid.
2. Section 9(1)(h) of the World Heritage Properties Conservation Act 1983 is
valid. In consequence, except with the consent in writing of the Commonwealth
Minister, it is unlawful for any person to do the following acts in relation
to particular specified property adjacent to the Franklin River, including
Kutikina Cave and Deena Reena Cave: (a) carrying out works in the course of
constructing or continuing to construct a dam that, when constructed, will be
capable of causing the inundation of that peroperty or any part of it; (b)
carrying out works preparatory to the construction of such a dam; (c) carrying
out works associated with the construction or continued construction of such a
dam.
3. Section 10(4) of the World Heritage Properties Conservation Act 1983 is
valid. In consequence, except with the written consent of the Commonwealth
Minister, it is unlawful for a trading corporation for the purpose of its
trading