Baker v The Queen & Fardon v Attorney General for the State of Queensland


Autoria(s): Roos, Oscar
Data(s)

01/01/2005

Resumo

In 2004, the High Court of Australia had cause to revisit its 1996 decision in Kable, as well as to consider the nature of judicial power as it relates to the deprivation of liberty, outside of the parameters of conventional criminal sentencing. The resulting decisions of Fardon and Baker demonstrate the lack of constitutional protections afforded to people who become the focus of governmental campaigns to be "tough on crime". The so-called "Kable principle", as construed by the High Court in 2004, may prove to be the "constitutional watch dog that barks but once".<br />

Identificador

http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30003204

Idioma(s)

eng

Publicador

School of Law, Deakin University

Relação

http://dro.deakin.edu.au/eserv/DU:30003204/roos-bakervthequeen-2005.pdf

http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=20052356;res=AGISPT

Direitos

2005, School of Law, Deakin University

Palavras-Chave #actions & defenses #judicial power #judgments #action & defenses (Administrative law) #Constitutional law
Tipo

Journal Article